Visas tekstas 
Trečiadienis, 2018 m. balandžio 18 d. - Strasbūras Atnaujinta informacija

19. „Cambridge Analytica“ ir „Facebook“: duomenų apsauga ir piliečių privatumas kaip gynybos linija prieš manipuliavimą rinkimais (diskusijos)
Kalbų vaizdo įrašas

  Președintele. – Următorul punct de pe ordinea de zi este dezbaterea privind Declarații ale Consiliului și Comisiei, referitoare la Cambridge Analytica și Facebook: protecția datelor și viața privată a cetățenilor ca linie de apărare împotriva manipulării alegerilor (2018/2667(RSP)).


  Monika Panayotova, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, the news that Cambridge Analytica used Facebook profiles to perform targeted political messaging has led to a loss of trust all over the world. People are concerned about the security of the personal data they share on social networks and digital platforms.

In order to find out whether Facebook and Cambridge Analytica breached data protection rules, enforcement authorities are investigating. At EU level, the Article 29 Committee, which gathers the data protection authorities of the Member States, is following the developments closely.

At the political level, the concerns are real and are being taken seriously. You can see that in the conclusions of the European Council of 22 and 23 March. It has also led Commissioner Jourová to demand further clarification from Facebook about the extent to which EU citizens were affected. The debate here today gives another political signal from the European Union that we are worried. I am grateful that you have asked the Presidency to participate in your discussion on ‘data protection and citizen’s privacy as a line of defence against election manipulation’.

The Facebook and Cambridge Analytica case touches the heart of the EU’s core principles. The rights to protection of personal data and privacy are enshrined in the European Charter on Fundamental rights. Those rights are the basis for the new EU data protection rules laid down in the General Data Protection Regulation, which will become applicable in a few weeks.

The GDPR will help to protect personal data in the European Union, as it empowers persons to more easily find out what personal data companies hold about them and for what purposes such data are processed. Furthermore, the GDPR provides for the possibility for data protection authorities to impose high fines. This will discipline companies to comply with the rules. Finally, the GDPR provides for a consistency mechanism. This ensures that the national data protection authorities coordinate amongst each other their decisions so that the European Union speaks with a single voice.

The Facebook and Cambridge Analytica case poses a lot of other fundamental questions than data protection: how can we protect democratic elections in times of massive digital disinformation or manipulation? In October 2017, the Council held its annual rule of law dialogue on the topic ‘Media Pluralism and the Rule of Law in the Digital Age’. Ministers agreed that free, reliable and pluralistic media underpin effective democracy, while digital disinformation on a massive scale has the potential to undermine it. In this context, we have all seen the recent, but very timely, opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on online manipulation and personal data.

The Facebook and Cambridge Analytica case has brought to the fore the importance of protecting personal data and privacy. The European Union has already recognised that importance in its new data protection rules, which provide tools to protect personal data in an effective manner. The silver lining of this case is that adequate data protection is getting the political attention it deserves in other parts of the world as well.

However, well-functioning data protection rules do not provide the full answer against manipulating elections. Other measures going beyond data protection are also necessary for safeguarding the rule of law and democracy. New challenges to the rule of law and human rights, such as increased levels of disinformation, have to be counterbalanced by increased levels of media literacy. Current legislation is deemed to be sufficient in broad terms, but it must be better applied and supported by flanking measures, such as fact-checking websites, voluntary codes of conduct and intensified cooperation with service providers. This is already in place in several countries, as well as at EU level.

Let us use the protests about Facebook and Cambridge Analytica to advance the thinking on these fundaments of our societies. In that context, it is very opportune that, on 16 May, our leaders will discuss the need for transparent practices and full protection of privacy and personal data on the part of social networks and digital platforms.


  Věra Jourová, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, your initiative to have a plenary debate on this topic is very welcome. This case is too important to treat as business as usual. It is up to all of us to draw the right lessons from this Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal.

There is work ongoing on three aspects of this scandal. First, personal data. Up to 2.7 million Europeans could have been affected by this scandal. Second, broader effects on our democratic processes, elections included. Third, the criminal aspects of the case.

I would like to share with you some details about the different aspects. Let me start with data protection. It has been said that the way we deal with privacy is the defining fundamental rights issue of our time. The Facebook-Cambridge Analytica case shows that protection of personal data can have a major impact on our democracy and on our elections. In this House, you have known the importance of these issues for many years and have adopted the data protection package, the so-called the General Data Protection Regulation, known under the acronym of GDPR.

We Europeans have got this right. We have foreseen that cases like this might happen and we wanted to be well-equipped. If there is one positive thing coming out of this crisis, it is the awareness about the importance of personal data protection that has been generated among ordinary citizens in Europe and around the world. All around the world, democratic countries are now looking at GDPR for inspiration.

The GDPR basically gives back control of personal data to the people. For instance, consent under the GDPR must be given by a clear and affirmative action and cannot be hidden among legalistic terms and conditions that nobody ever reads. Otherwise, you have the right to take your data with you when moving to another provider. Also, the GDPR reinforces the role of national protection authorities and gives them the possibility to impose quite dramatically high fines.

The proposed e-privacy regulation further specifies the transparency requirements for browsers and apps, but aside from this positive effect, there is a serious situation which must be investigated and which must be prevented from occurring again. And let’s keep in mind that the GDPR is not in place yet, so we are assessing the Facebook scandal against the currently existing laws.

There is an investigation led by the UK’s data protection authority, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). I am in close touch with the ICO Commissioner and I have expressed my full support in her work. I expect Facebook to cooperate fully and at the highest level of the company. There is no time to be complacent about this.

I am also in frequent contact with the Chairwoman of the Article 29 Working Party and the future Chair of the European Data Protection Board, Ms Andrea Jelinek. All EU data protection authorities met in Brussels last week, and I am pleased they decided to launch a dedicated working group to social media, not only Facebook.

On 25 May when GDPR becomes applicable, it is absolutely crucial that those business models that monitor huge amounts of our personal data are under full scrutiny. The time for leniency is over, and it is good that the data protection authorities are getting ready for it. I am fully confident that European enforcers will make sure that Facebook fixes the mistakes and complies with the new data protection laws.

Now it is very important that we offer help to those almost three million citizens affected by the scandal. The data protection authorities issued information last week about how their interest is protected and what they can do to ensure better protection of their privacy.

Finally, I was directly in contact with Facebook and I spoke to the Chief Operating Officer, Ms Sheryl Sandberg last week. I underlined that I expect Facebook to provide more detailed information and to cooperate fully with the Irish and British data protection authorities.

We must better and fully understand not only what happened to the data of EU citizens, but what is going on with this date even now. Of particular concern to me is the information to European citizens affected by the scandal. I was told that Facebook has started to inform people last week.

Facebook also confirm that there could be more apps that harvested the personal data of users and those of their friends. I am also getting information from another source from the British ICO. So I urged Facebook to take all necessary steps to mitigate any potential negative consequences for users in the future.

I have also advised Ms Sandberg that Mr Zuckerberg should accept the invitation of the European Parliament to appear in front of the responsible committees, and Vice-President Ansip met with Mr Zuckerberg in Silicon Valley yesterday, and the Facebook CEO reconfirmed his will to cooperate closely with the European authorities on rebuilding trust after this scandal. Vice-President Ansip referred to the invitation by the European Parliament as a measure of rebuilding the trust.

We also have to speak seriously about the impact this scandal might have on our democratic societies. By having access to personal information it seems that it was possible for various actors to micro-target citizens and help spread fake news and propaganda. And this was all done in the maze of digital reality with zero transparency and without any consent from the users.

This scandal is a wake-up call for all of us to start a serious debate on what role social media plays today, and what role they should play in our elections in the future. Traditional media are under very strict rules. Social media largely cooperate without any limits in this respect. And to be absolutely clear, social media created unprecedented opportunities to engage in a political debate and communicate directly with millions of voters, but they also created opportunities for some actors to manipulate and abuse social media.

The algorithms used in the business model of Facebook or other companies may have facilitated the spreading of fake news and untruthful posts and reinforced so-called ‘filter bubbles’ and the antagonisation within this society.

So we need to understand better what the current situation in Europe is. Organising elections is largely in the remit of the Member States. However, as a Commissioner responsible for Union citizenship rights, I have invited the EU electoral authorities for a meeting at the end of April. I would like to hear from them how they handle social media and online advertising in their campaign rules. To that end, we have sent them a set of detailed questions in advance, so I hope I will get very concrete and clear answers on 25 April.

I would like for all of us to act responsibly and not to jump the gun. Our response should not only be about Facebook. Our response should take into account the wider implications of an unregulated internet. Some steps have already been taken.

As you might know, the Commission has initiated a code of conduct on hate speech such as racism and xenophobia, which has shown good results. We adopted in February a recommendation on combating illegal content online. We will present next week a communication on how to tackle online disinformation, calling for more transparency, the promotion of diversity of information and credibility of information online. This will be a first opportunity to refer to the very first lessons to draw from the scandal in the official policy paper.

We will also adopt a communication on artificial intelligence, which, among other actions, aims at debating and developing ethical principles in this respect. The Commission is carrying out a pilot project requested by the European Parliament on algorithmic awareness-building, which will focus on how algorithms can shape, filter or personalise information flows that may reinforce biases.

And last week, the Commission proposed the new deal for consumers package, which includes collective actions in case of mass harm situations. This can also be a strong enforcement tool in case of privacy violations. Finally, there are the important criminal law investigations in this case which need to be carried out by the national law enforcement bodies.

To conclude, what is guiding our work in the Commission is a strong notion that the internet is not a space free of the rule of law. The rules that apply offline also need to be fully respected in the online world, and we need to make sure our modern data protection laws are thoroughly applied. I look forward to hearing your views today and to continue working together on these important issues for our society.


  Esteban González Pons, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor presidente, el caso Facebook y Cambridge Analytica es solo la punta del iceberg. El mundo digital es una duplicación de nuestra vida a la que nos entregamos sin tomar ninguna precaución y casi sin exigir ninguna seguridad.

La inteligencia del ser humano está limitada por su propia conciencia; sin embargo, la inteligencia artificial no conoce ningún límite. Es paradójico que, como legisladores, pongamos más cuidado en prevenir los errores que cometen personas, limitadas por su conciencia, que máquinas que no saben nada de ética ni de moral.

La generación de baby boomers, a la que pertenezco, cree que el mundo digital es solo una extensión divertida del mundo analógico. Estamos muy equivocados: lo que ocurre en el ciberespacio modifica el espacio; lo que ocurre en internet no se queda en internet.

Las mentiras son tan antiguas como la política: nacieron a la vez que la democracia y a la vez que la política. Política, mentiras y democracia conviven desde la antigua Grecia. La diferencia es que, a día de hoy, las mentiras pueden ser más poderosas que la democracia y más poderosas que la política, y más numerosas que las verdades.

En las próximas elecciones europeas los mentirosos intentarán que en este Parlamento haya una mayoría antieuropea, y estamos a tiempo de evitarlo protegiendo a los periodistas profesionales y aprobando una legislación europea que ponga límites a los mentirosos.

La mentira es tan peligrosa como el nacionalpopulismo, y normalmente es su instrumento. Lo único que no podemos hacer es permanecer de brazos cruzados.


  Maria João Rodrigues, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, the scandal of Facebook and Cambridge Analytica is a wake—up call. All of a sudden, everybody understands that the digital revolution involves opportunities but also risks, and sometimes threats, of creating companies without corporate responsibility, of creating jobs without proper social protection and now about taking on board our personal data and using these for the purpose of economic and political manipulation.

We just cannot accept this. We need to regain control of our lives and Europe must take the lead in this. This is the right moment to invent our European way for the digital revolution and to regain digital sovereignty. And the only way to regain digital sovereignty is through full use of the European scale.

We have taken the first step. The S&D Group played a pioneering role, calling in this Parliament for the regulation on general data protection, but of course this is just the first step. We know now there is an important regulation in the hands of the Council on e—privacy, and we urge the Council to start a trilogue immediately, because the urgency is clear.

Of course we want Mr Zuckerberg to appear in front of us in the European Parliament to give proper explanations and proper guarantees, but I believe – and also have expectations regarding the Commission– that we need a broader approach in order to pave the way for our European agenda on digital governance, starting with a proper assessment of how social networks work, and need to encourage European innovation in this area. This has to do with how we deal with artificial intelligence. Most of all, we would make sure that all citizens can count on generalised digital skills to master the major developments which are taking place.


  Helga Stevens, namens de ECR-Fractie. – Voorzitter, vandaag zijn persoonlijke onlinedata zoals leeftijd, geslacht of politieke voorkeur een bijzonder lucratief goed. Bovendien worden die gegevens vaak verkocht zonder medeweten van de persoon zelf. Het recht op privacy en de bescherming van de digitale ruimte worden dus belangrijker dan ooit. Als wetgevers moeten wij onze burgers beschermen tegen het misbruik van privacy, maar we moeten ook de veiligheid van onze burgers verzekeren. Het recht op privacy mag geen absoluut recht zijn.

Vandaag zien we heel duidelijk dat terroristen al te vaak door de mazen van het net glippen door het recht op privacy te misbruiken. Onderzoeksrechters klagen dat ze vaak achter de feiten aanlopen. Ze kunnen bijvoorbeeld niet bij opgeslagen data zoals WhatsApp-berichten waarin terroristen aanslagen bespreken. Het recht op privacy laat deze terroristen toe om hun criminele activiteiten anoniem en ongestraft voort te zetten. Dit is een onbedoeld en ongewenst neveneffect van het recht op privacy. Daarom moeten we werk maken van een meer evenwichtige balans tussen privacy en veiligheid. Het kan immers niet de bedoeling zijn dat door bescherming van het ene het andere teniet wordt gedaan. Privacy en veiligheid moeten naast elkaar kunnen bestaan, niet zonder elkaar. We moeten daarom verhinderen dat de digitale ruimte wordt misbruikt, of het nu door techgiganten is of door criminelen en terroristen.


  Sophia in ‘t Veld, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, thanks to Mark Zuckerberg, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is now the best known European law ever, even in the US Congress.

Yes, thank you, Mark, this one’s for you! I think Mr Zuckerberg would be well advised to appear before this House out of respect for hundreds of millions of European Facebook users who feel deceived. There are actually more users here than in the US, and I think Zuckerberg should be here. We should not be visiting him in the United States. He should be here.

But today’s debate is not about Facebook. The European Parliament, yes, and also the European Data Protection authorities will scrutinise very closely whether the new Facebook privacy arrangements are compliant with all EU legislation, but we also need to take a very critical look at ourselves.

We talk the talk, but do we also walk the walk, Commission, Council and dear friends? Because amongst those who are voicing their outrage at Facebook are many who have consistently voted against stricter privacy protection, and continue to do so. Like those – including the President of this House, dear friends – who summoned Mr Zuckerberg to the European Parliament, but they voted against e-privacy, so a bit of consistency, please.

I also note that the European data protection authorities have hardly responded to earlier reports on Cambridge Analytica and Facebook. It has been known since last year – why have they been so slow? And despite the jubilation about GDPR, Member States have not nearly allocated the necessary means to the national data protection authorities to enable them to properly enforce the GDPR.

I also note that the advice of designated experts, like the European Data Protection Supervisor and Working Party 29, are being systematically ignored. Their advice on data retention, PNR, Safe Harbour: ignored! And all subsequently scrapped by the European Court of Justice. Worryingly, decisions by the European Court of Justice are also being ignored. Now will the Commission remain deaf to the recommendations of Working Party 29 on PNR and Privacy Shield, or act?

Because while we are busy barricading the front door to keep the likes of Mr Zuckerberg out, the back door is wide open. And we are giving away our way our personal data by the truckload, not just to our own government agencies, but also to other countries like the United States, with legal safeguards that carry about as much weight as Donald’s tweets.

European citizens are left out in the cold, unprotected. Yes, the Facebook case is a wake-up call for all of us. Mr Zuckerberg, privacy is not dead. It’s alive and kicking.


  Ska Keller, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, there are more Facebook users in Europe than there are in the US. The social network might be based in the Silicon Valley, but it is active worldwide and, therefore, it also has responsibilities all across the globe. I have said it before and will repeat it again, Mark Zuckerberg has to come to the European Parliament to answer our questions; a simple apology will not do. And it will not do either if the Commissioners now start to travel to the US and ask very nicely for audiences with Mr Zuckerberg.

It’s very worrying that one single tool can be so dominant on the market, and all of us know it can be a very annoying tool with all the ads and all the weird groups that you are being added to. But it is also probably the best way – or only way – to we can stay in touch with most of our friends because they are on it.

It’s also the only place where you can share cat pictures with your grandmother; nowhere else could you possibly do that, so we stay there. And despite the dramatic data leakages, despite the ads, despite all of that, we keep spending and wasting our time scrolling down our timeline.

For many in Europe, Facebook has become a necessity, rather than a nice option. That also means that Facebook has a huge responsibility, and so far it has shied away from taking up this responsibility. It has ignored even the most basic data protection rules, and that must be over, once and for all.

And it’s our duty as European legislators to make sure that our citizens and their data is protected. It’s our duty, they have put their trust in us and we need to comply with that,


  Cornelia Ernst, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Ja, was wir heute mit Facebook erleben, erinnert fatal an die längst eingetretene Wirklichkeit des Bestsellers „The Circle“. Es geht überhaupt nicht nur um Cambridge Analytikca, sondern um einen Konzern, der in der globalen Medienbranche beherrschend geworden ist, ohne dafür ethische Verantwortung zu übernehmen. Und Facebook ist doch keine neutrale Plattform! Die Wirklichkeit verkürzt sich mit jedem Klick in Algorithmen, basierend auf einer Software, über die entschieden wird, was gezeigt wird und was nicht. So kann Stück um Stück auch manipuliert werden.

Zuckerberg ist das nicht irgendwie passiert. Der hat da nicht Unwissenheit vorzutäuschen. Wusste er doch seit 2015 um den Skandal, und er hat nichts unternommen! Warum hat er denn nichts unternommen? Weil letztlich das auch ein Geschäftsmodell von Facebook ist, mit Daten logischerweise Geld zu machen. Das mögen sie ja tun, aber dann haben sie auch Verantwortung zu übernehmen. Ebenso auch Google, ebenso auch Amazon. Um Missbrauch vorzubeugen, sind daher klare Regeln und Konsequenzen nötig.

Was wir als Fraktion verlangen, ist volle Aufklärung über den Missbrauch europäischer Daten durch Facebook. Ich will, dass Zuckerberg hierherkommt und uns Rede und Antwort steht, vor allem auch im zuständigen Ausschuss. Ich will von ihm wissen, wie Facebook tatsächlich die Datenschutzgrundverordnung umsetzen will nach dem 25. Mai, wenn das dann tatsächlich gültig ist. Gibt es keine Garantien, dann muss es die entsprechenden Strafen hageln. Dafür sollten wir uns einsetzen.

Und noch etwas: Es geht nicht nur um eine Vertrauenskrise bei Facebook, sondern darum, Grundrechte zu wahren, und da, hochverehrte Kommission, müssen Sie sehr viel mehr aktiv werden, da müssen Sie tatsächlich darauf drängen, dass das passiert. Ansonsten müsste es entsprechende Strafen hageln.


  William (The Earl of) Dartmouth, on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Mr President, before going any further, let’s get one myth out of the way. There are many reasons why the Brexit referendum was won or lost, nothing to do with Cambridge Analytica was in any way material, and we should not confuse sales talk from an old Etonian with reality.

Nonetheless, hidden in this lengthy statement for debate, there is a very important, indeed vital, issue. Let us start from the fact that Mr Mark Zuckerberg is not as nice as he looks. Mr Zuckerberg’s approach to business has been well set out in the feature film The Social Network.

And behind all the blather and misleading PR speak about the ‘Facebook community’ there is a gruesome reality. Facebook is a monopoly. It maintains its monopoly by a variety of predatory business practices, and one simple illustration is that Facebook buys up potential competitors. This is what it did, for example, with Instagram, Messenger and WhatsApp.

But there is more. Facebook makes its money – let there be no misunderstanding – from selling data and advertising targeted from that data. Users do not have complete control over their Facebook data, and this cannot be good.

And there is still worse. It emerged in the Washington hearings that Facebook has what it describes as ‘shadow profiles’ on people who have not signed up to Facebook, and these profiles are without their consent. Such data does not get deleted when leaving, because these people had never joined Facebook in the first place. In its methods of collecting data, Facebook has become like a virus that you can never get rid of. This is not only distasteful, it is entirely shocking.

The conclusion is clear. The problem is not Cambridge Analytica, the problem is Facebook. And the emphasis on Cambridge Analytica and election manipulation is a distraction. As I said, the fundamental problem is Facebook itself, the manner in which Facebook operates, its predatory business practices, its lack of ethical principles, and its monopoly. In short, the monopoly that is Facebook needs breaking up.


  Jean-Luc Schaffhauser, au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, nous sommes devant un choix de civilisation, de culture, où se jouent effectivement la démocratie et la liberté.

Il n’y a qu’un seul moyen de sortir de la mainmise des GAFA sur la société: en changeant de modèle économique. La donnée appartient à celui qui l’émet et, à partir du moment où on l’exploite, premièrement, il faut payer, deuxièmement, il faut le consentement de la personne concernée. Si on exploite la donnée sans le consentement de l’intéressé, la sanction doit être énorme, de l’ordre du chiffre d’affaires de la société.

Il faut sortir de ce modèle économique. Je l’ai proposé dans un rapport à ce Parlement, qui n’a même pas voulu discuter du rapport, mais l’a réécrit! Nous sommes dans l’hypocrisie totale. Aussi longtemps que vous ne voudrez pas sortir de ce modèle économique qui permet la domination totale, le monopole et la mainmise sur la démocratie par quelques sociétés, vous serez dans l’hypocrisie. Changez le modèle économique, alors vous serez crédibles.


  Κωνσταντίνος Παπαδάκης (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, καμία έκπληξη δεν νοιώθουμε για την υπόθεση Facebook ή και άλλων μέσων κοινωνικής δικτύωσης που συγκεντρώνουν, διατηρούν και επεξεργάζονται προσωπικά στοιχεία για δικό τους πολιτικό, εμπορικό και κάθε άλλο όφελος. Κάθε κλικ είναι και ένα αυτοφακέλωμα που αγοράζεται και πουλιέται πολλαπλά και αλυσιδωτά από μονοπώλια, μυστικές υπηρεσίες, αστικά κράτη που ανταγωνίζονται, βγάζοντας ο ένας τα άπλυτα του άλλου στη φόρα. Προκλητικά στο τέλος λένε στους ίδιους τους χρήστες «Ας προσέχατε!», εν ολίγοις: καπιταλισμός, που η βαρβαρότητά του αποτυπώνεται και on line. Οι μεγαλοστομίες περί ελευθερίας και οι κενές περιεχομένου διακηρύξεις, όταν το τσεκούρι της λογοκρισίας πέφτει σε οτιδήποτε ριζοσπαστικό αμφισβητήσει αυτό το σύστημα, είναι πραγματικά αέρας κοπανιστός όπως και οι διακηρύξεις περί προστασίας των δικαιωμάτων και οι νουθεσίες περί καλής χρήσης και κανόνων. Η επιστήμη και η τεχνολογία ασφυκτιούν κάτω από την μπότα του καπιταλιστικού κέρδους και από την ιδιοκτησία που ανήκει στους ομίλους. Μόνο με την ανατροπή τους μπορούν να ικανοποιηθούν οι εργατικές λαϊκές ανάγκες ώστε το Διαδίκτυο και οι εφαρμογές του να αξιοποιούνται για το συμφέρον των εργαζομένων.


  Roberta Metsola (PPE). – Mr President, I was shocked by the Cambridge Analytica scandal that affected so many millions of people in the EU and the US. Sometimes it feels like we are living in a reality closer to that imagined by Orwell or Huxley than perhaps we would care to believe. This is an era where data is the new gold and where unscrupulous politicians and those who support them will use and abuse our personal information to make their propaganda appear as fact, to help swing elections and referenda and to essentially subvert democratic processes.

This scandal is not only about misuse of data. This is about systems that were built for good being used against us. We need to ensure that elections and referenda that look free on the surface are actually so in reality. We built our Data Protection Regulation and Privacy Shield precisely because of these threats, and our legislation must be able to face this test and any entity responsible for breaches must be held to account. We have to examine the loopholes that still exist and how these can be closed, because people expect privacy online and we must ensure that their expectations are met.

Cambridge Analytica has a lot to answer for. We have seen how they have abused our data in the US, the UK and many Member States, including my own, Malta, where we learned that thousands of people had been affected. In many cases, we still do not know who the people who hired Cambridge Analytica were and for what purpose the 6 000 Maltese nationals’ and millions of EU citizens’ data was harvested.

The links between the abuse of data and our democratic processes must be investigated. I welcome the Parliament initiating such a process.


  Birgit Sippel (S&D). – Herr Präsident! Wissen ist Macht, und Macht lässt sich nur allzu leicht missbrauchen, wenn es keine ausreichenden Regeln zum Schutz des Individuums gibt. Die Folgen mangelnder Regulierung sehen wir im aktuellen Facebook-Skandal: millionenfacher Datenmissbrauch zur Wählermanipulation. Reumütige Auftritte Zuckerbergs können es nicht verschleiern: Facebook betreibt einen aggressiven Datenkapitalismus, versteckt hinter bunten likes und scheinbar harmlosen Apps.

Dass Facebook derzeit mit Gesichtserkennungssoftware experimentiert, zeigt, wie gering der Lerneffekt tatsächlich ist. Und doch ist Facebook nur die Spitze des Eisbergs. Das Sammeln und Verarbeiten von Daten ist zum Geschäftsmodell geworden, bei dem wir manipuliert werden, als Kunden und Verbraucher ebenso wie als Wähler. Am Ende bezahlen wir viele der digitalen und scheinbar kostenlosen Angebote mit einem Verlust an Privatsphäre, Entscheidungsfreiheit und Demokratie.

Regierungen, Parlamente, Wirtschaft und Zivilgesellschaft können jetzt beweisen, dass sie verstanden haben und handeln. Dank der Datenschutzverordnung kann die EU ab Mai den Datenkapitalisten in der einzigen Sprache antworten, die sie verstehen: der des Geldes. Bis zu vier Prozent des weltweiten Umsatzes können die Strafen betragen. Und wenn Facebook dann dubiosen Apps erlaubt, Nutzern durch unzureichende oder Fehlinformationen ihre Einwilligung abzuringen, muss auch Facebook dafür geradestehen.

Aber die Datenschutzverordnung allein reicht nicht. Wir brauchen endlich die ePrivacy-Verordnung zum Schutz der Privatsphäre online. ePrivacy schützt nicht nur personenbezogene Daten, sondern die Vertraulichkeit der Kommunikation als Ganzes. Die bisherigen Regeln sind so veraltet, dass sie Akteure wie Facebook noch nicht einmal abdecken. Das muss sich ändern. ePrivacy soll die Inhalte von Gesprächen in privaten Facebook Messengern schützen, die teilweise ebenfalls mitgelesen wurden. Außerdem sieht die Verordnung besondere Schutzstandards zur Einwilligung in personalisierte Werbung vor. Und wir wollen strenge technische Vorgaben für den Browser, um Tracking nur mit dem Einverständnis des Nutzers zu ermöglichen.

Aber wie schon bei der Datenschutzgrundverordnung stehen die Mitgliedstaaten bei ePrivacy auf der Bremse und machen sich zum Handlanger der Industrie. Das Europäische Parlament hat bereits seit Herbst eine Position. Die Mitgliedstaaten müssen angesichts des millionenfachen Rechtsbruchs durch Facebook jetzt endlich mit einer Position nachziehen, damit die gemeinsamen Verhandlungen starten können und wir unsere Bürger auch digital besser schützen können.


  Daniel Dalton (ECR). – Mr President, trust is a vital commodity in the digital era, as Facebook is finding out now. If you fail in your service or in your duty of care or your protection of data, you have nowhere to hide – consumers will desert you.

Facebook now needs to explain what it has done and how it is going to protect users’ data – not just because we demand it, but because their users demand it. Users may agree to share their own data on the site, but they did not agree to their friends sharing their details on their behalf. Facebook needs to vet its third—party apps much more carefully, and we need to get to the bottom of what Cambridge Analytica were doing and what effect they actually had on election results.

But the key for us is to learn from this: the digital revolution has empowered billions around the world, but it is embryonic and barriers are being tested by all in this uncertain data—driven new world. The GDPR which comes into force next month is also testing barriers. That alone brings about much more protection of personal data. Facebook itself has said it will apply it globally.

So let’s find out what happened here first and see how well the GDPR worked in practice – and then, when we have a full picture, assess if more legislation is needed.


  Cecilia Wikström (ALDE). – Herr talman! Sanningen är att vi EU-medborgare står alla fullkomligt skyddslösa ute i kylan när de skandalösa avslöjandena kring Facebook och Cambridge Analytica avslöjar hur sanningen – hur verkligheten – ser ut.

Skandalen som har drabbat miljontals Facebookanvändare utgör brott mot våra fria öppna och demokratiska samhällen och är en fundamental kränkning av varje människas rätt till personlig integritet.

Jag kräver att Facebook och andra sociala medier tar ansvar för hur våra personliga data utnyttjas i politiska syften. Det här har blivit oerhört aktualiserat i och med skandalerna kring Rysslands påverkan i valen i USA.

Det bör nu vara självklart att varje företag lever upp till det som dataskyddsförordningen stipulerar. Vanlig anständighet kräver att Mark Zuckerberg svarar ja på talmannens inbjudan att komma hit till parlamentet för att förklara sig. Omedelbart borde vi ha det svaret, för allt annat är helt oacceptabelt.


  Jan Philipp Albrecht (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, these days we all can see advertisements by Facebook praising the European Union’s General Data Protection (GDPR) as the new standard to protect citizens’ privacy and data in Europe and everywhere in the world, as Facebook reacts by implementing the GDPR standards on a global level.

So, 37 days before the GDPR is even being applied, it is already setting the global standard for protecting personal data. We can be very proud, as the European Union and, especially as Parliament, that we have a tool to protect the privacy and integrity of our citizens’ lives with the GDPR in place. But I would also agree it is very important to understand that there is a missing brick in this wall, and that is the e-privacy regulation. We still need to fix that problem because the communication data needs to be protected in a specific way.

It is important that Facebook is not only relying on ads, as they say is their business model, but is also delivering for trust by delivering solutions and actions in the way of how they do their business model. The business model of just earning money by using the data of individuals has to change, because that’s not only Facebook’s business model. There are other companies – we don’t talk about Google, Twitter, or even companies you maybe not have heard of like Actium or Thomson Reuters having your data, exploiting it and selling it.

We need to get more rules in place, especially also for consumer control to get connectivity across the platforms in order to have a choice.


  Νεοκλής Συλικιώτης (GUE/NGL). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, το σκάνδαλο Cambridge Analytica και Facebook απέδειξε στην πράξη τους κινδύνους που ενυπάρχουν στην παγκοσμιοποίηση όταν η εξουσία συγκεντρώνεται στα χέρια λίγων επιτήδειων και στα χέρια κερδοσκοπικών μονοπωλίων, οι οποίοι έχουν όλα τα μέσα πλέον για να φακελώνουν και να χειραγωγούν τις μάζες προς ίδιον όφελος. Πρόκειται για τη μαζικότερη παραβίαση προσωπικών δεδομένων μέσω κοινωνικής δικτύωσης η οποία έχει ανακαλυφθεί. Ως GUE/NGL καταδικάζουμε έντονα κάθε παραβίαση των προσωπικών δεδομένων και τονίζουμε πως είναι επάναγκες να υπάρξει άμεσα ολοκληρωμένος δημοκρατικός έλεγχος, ρυθμίσεις αλλά και απλοποίηση των διαδικασιών, ώστε οι χρήστες στα μέσα κοινωνικής δικτύωσης να μπορούν να διαχειρίζονται τα προσωπικά τους δεδομένα και να ρυθμίζουν το ποιος θα μπορεί να έχει πρόσβαση σε αυτά. Αναμένουμε από την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση να υιοθετήσει πιο αυστηρούς κανόνες και να θέσει σε ισχύ ένα ολοκληρωμένο κανονιστικό και νομοθετικό πλαίσιο για την πραγματική προστασία των προσωπικών δεδομένων. Στην Ευρώπη υπάρχουν 370 εκατομμύρια χρήστες του Facebook και γι’ αυτό πρέπει να απαιτηθούν νέες διαβουλεύσεις, πρέπει να προσκληθεί το Facebook στο Ευρωκοινοβούλιο για να συζητήσουμε μαζί τους τις αναγκαίες αλλαγές που πρέπει να κάνουν, τους νέους κανόνες που πρέπει να εφαρμόσουν όπως διακήρυξαν, αλλά και ακόμα πιο αυστηρές κανονιστικές διατάξεις.


  Isabella Adinolfi (EFDD). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, quanto accaduto conferma che il modello di business delle multinazionali del web si fonda sulla sistematica raccolta dei dati degli utenti. Dati che sono diventati il petrolio del ventunesimo secolo, impiegati per profilare i consumatori/utenti, in modo da poter determinare i loro comportamenti, e poi ceduti a terzi. Ciò che manca, e il caso di Cambridge Analytica l'ha scoperchiato, è l'assenza di consapevolezza da parte dei cittadini.

Allora dobbiamo domandarci: come reagire? Chi sta decidendo al posto nostro? Qual è il ruolo che gli Stati e l'Unione europea devono avere di fronte a questi fenomeni? È ora di porre fine ai monopoli di pochi grandi giganti del web che, sfruttando i nostri dati personali e influenzando i nostri comportamenti, hanno accumulato fortune miliardarie.

Forse è ora di iniziare a considerare i nostri dati personali un bene comune, da tutelare, così come altri beni comuni come l'acqua, il territorio, la costa il mare. Abbiamo una grande occasione, che è l'approvazione del regolamento dell'e-privacy, che è ancora bloccato in Consiglio.

Concludo con un'affermazione dell'economista americano Friedman, che dice "Non esistono pasti gratis" e quindi ciò che non paghiamo in termini monetari lo paghiamo con i nostri dati e con la nostra minore privacy.


  Dobromir Sośnierz (NI). – Panie przewodniczący, Albo działania Facebooka są zgodne z prawem i wtedy nie ma problemu, albo nie są zgodne z prawem i wtedy są sądy i prokuratury od tego, żeby to prawo egzekwować. Naprawdę nie ma powodu, żeby Parlament, który nie jest organem sądowniczym, zajmował się pojedynczymi przypadkami stosowania prawa, bo inaczej nic innego by nie robił. Parlament ustanawia prawo, a nie je egzekwuje. Na tym polega trójpodział władzy. Nie można pisać prawa od nowa za każdym razem, kiedy ktoś je złamie po prostu. Nie pisze się prawa pod pojedyncze przypadki.

Wy wykorzystujecie każdy taki głośny przypadek do tego, żeby wepchnąć swoje biurokratyczne łapy jeszcze głębiej w kieszenie i intymność obywateli, ale nie powinno to być takim pretekstem, bo o ile rzeczywiście nie czuję się pewnie z tym, że Zuckerberg zarządza moimi danymi osobowymi, to tym bardziej nie ufam temu, że moje dane będą bezpieczne w waszych rękach, kiedy Wy się w to wmieszacie. Bo z Facebooka to mogę się wylogować w każdej chwili, a spod władzy unijnych biurokratów już nie tak łatwo.


  Axel Voss (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Wir müssen uns hier ein bisschen ehrlicher machen. Die systematische Auswertung und anschließende Nutzung großer Mengen von Nutzerdaten ist kein neues Phänomen. Seit vielen Jahren sehen wir regelmäßig solche Beiträge in den Medien und dazu auch die Berichte der Datenschützer. Von daher ist das, was wir hier sehen, jetzt vielleicht die Spitze des Eisbergs, aber es ist in dem Sinne nicht neu, und dass der Handel mit Daten stattfindet, ist auch nicht neu. Deshalb haben wir ja auch diese Datenschutzgrundverordnung hier auf der europäischen Ebene erlassen.

Was wir, glaube ich, noch nicht so richtig eingeschätzt haben und wo ich auch sagen würde, dass das noch nicht die richtige Antwort auf diese Datennutzungen in der Zukunft ist, ist im Grunde, dass wir eine alte Struktur in diese neue Welt übertragen.

Wir hätten uns genauso gut auch über die Einwilligung mehr Gedanken machen müssen, weil die Einwilligung eigentlich das Element ist, das letztlich die Rechtmäßigkeit der Datenverarbeitung und Datennutzung auch gewährleistet. Hier waren wir in diesem ganzen Vorgehen etwas zu nachlässig.

Von daher glaube ich eigentlich, dass wir noch mehr darüber nachdenken müssen, ob wir an diese Geschichten nicht noch anders herangehen müssen. Wir brauchen eigentlich mehr Kontrolle. Und wir müssen uns auch ehrlich machen. Selbst mit einer neuen Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, die nächsten Monat in Kraft tritt, werden wir dennoch solche Skandale haben, weil der Missbrauch sich nicht regulieren lässt. Wir können nur davon ausgehen, dass wir eine Handreichung dafür bieten, wie man im Rahmen des rechtlich Möglichen mit diesen Daten umgeht. Aber den Missbrauch werden wir nicht regulieren können.


  Claude Moraes (S&D). – Mr President, I would say to Mr González Pons that he should not worry about being from a generation that doesn’t fully understand this: the entire US Senate were not aware of what they were talking about, and I am of that generation where my eight-year-old knows more than I do.

Lindsey Graham, the US Senator, asked the question, ‘Do the Europeans have it right?’, and when Zuckerberg answered reluctantly, ‘yes you have’, this was a proud moment for our rapporteur and a proud moment for this Parliament: GDPR had arrived – but, more importantly, it had arrived in the subtle way which we know. Even if GDPR was fully complied with by Facebook, perhaps only 4% of its revenue would go. With full compliance, it would not solve the problem. This is because we are a sophisticated Parliament – as the Commissioner and others have said, we have many tools for the job, not just GDPR. Many have mentioned ePrivacy because of the important consent equation within ePrivacy, and we should really ask why the Council is blocking ePrivacy. It is the tool for the job. But on GDPR, the overarching issue is that we have higher data protection standards than in the United States.

I want to make one clear point here, which is that we have the credibility in the EU institutions and Parliament not just because we have millions more Facebook users than in the United States, but because we have a track record here legislatively, because we have tracked what Facebook has done wrongly for 14 years, and because we have the credibility and expertise here in this Parliament to call Mark Zuckerberg before us to examine what Facebook is doing. Let me tell you – for anyone who is not aware – that Facebook is powerful; so are the other platforms. The Indian Prime Minister today is at a Commonwealth summit, and let me tell you that millions – billions – of people are on Facebook; it is powerful, elections are in danger and our privacy is valuable. But here we have done the right thing – let us be proud of it and now go ahead and be credible and have those hearings.


  Monica Macovei (ECR). – Domnule președinte, Brittany Kaiser, fostă angajată la Cambridge Analytica, a afirmat în fața Parlamentului britanic că aplicația This is Your Digital Life este numai „vârful aisbergului”. A recunoscut că au existat și alte aplicații prin care s-au cules datele personale ale celor care folosesc Facebook, așa că numărul celor afectați depășește cu mult cifra de astăzi pe care o știm, de 87 000 000, așa cum a spus și Claude mai devreme.

Mark Zuckerberg a admis și el în fața senatorilor americani că e foarte posibil să existe legături între datele sustrase de Cambridge Analytica și Agenția de Cercetare a Internetului, „fabrica de troli” a Kremlinului.

Noul regulament pentru aplicarea datelor personale adoptat de Uniunea Europeană, cu insistența acestui Parlament, este într-adevăr un răspuns, să vedem dacă este suficient. Datele aparțin cetățenilor și în niciun caz ele nu trebuie folosite de Kremlin, de Moscova, de oricine altcineva, pentru distrugerea democrației, influențarea alegerilor și pentru a intra în viața privată a oamenilor.


  Morten Helveg Petersen (ALDE). – Hr. formand! Har vi fået den forkerte præsident i det hvide hus? Vi ved i hvert fald nu, at vejen til det ovale kontor har været brolagt med fake news og misbrug af Facebookdata - og endda at brexit-afstemningen måske kunne have fået et andet udfald. Det er aldeles skrækkeligt at tænke på! Der kun er et år til det næste valg til dette parlament, og hvordan sikrer vi os så, at det ikke ender på samme måde her? Hvis der er noget, denne skandale har lært os, så er det vigtigheden af fælles spilleregler i EU. Hvor mange tror, at små lande, herunder mit eget, Danmark, alene og på egen hånd ville kunne få Marc Zuckerberg og Facebook i tale?

Den nye europæiske databeskyttelsesordning er et skridt i den helt rigtige retning. De nye europæiske regler viser, at de bedste løsninger på fælles problemer netop er fælles. Vi er stærkere sammen, end vi er hver for sig - og det skal vi også være fremover, så vi kan sikre borgerne og vælgerne reel beskyttelse på nettet.


  President. – When you said that we had the wrong President, I thought for a moment that you were referring to me, and I was scared.


  Judith Sargentini (Verts/ALE). – Voorzitter, ik mocht in mijn krant een hele grote advertentie lezen. Daar stond: "Nieuwe EU-wetgeving betekent betere gegevensbescherming voor jou" en ik dacht: wat een hypocrisie, Mark Zuckerberg. Jij die met je grote geld jarenlang gelobbyd hebt tegen betere Europese gegevensbeschermingswetgeving. Jij die beweert dat wat jij doet mensen bij elkaar brengen is, dat het geen geld verdienen is. Maar dat is het wel. Het is geld verdienen. Het is geld verdienen met onze gegevens en het is tijd dat wij met onze wetten ervoor zorgen dat Mark Zuckerberg in de toekomst een ander businessmodel heeft. Ik ben inderdaad blij dat er nu nieuwe Europese gegevensbeschermingswetgeving is, maar we hebben daar niet Facebook voor te danken, het is het laatste waar we Facebook voor te danken hebben.


  Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, este não é um debate sobre redes sociais, é um debate sobre liberdade e sobre democracia. Durante o último século, nós construímos uma sociedade, uma cultura e uma economia baseadas na informação, mas não pensámos numa ética para proteger os dados. Aliás, a maioria desta casa impediu mesmo a real proteção da privacidade na era digital e os governos estão agora a bloqueá-la.

Sim. Algoritmos e software de aprendizagem automática são hoje uma arma de combate político. A Internet está cheia de algoritmos que analisam e preveem o nosso comportamento através de softwares obscuros. Não estamos apenas a falar de espiar ou de roubar os nossos dados, estamos a falar de softwares que, através dos nossos dados, determinam a que artigos temos acesso, com quem mantemos contacto, quem se pode manter em contacto connosco. Em suma, isto tem um nome e esse nome é manipulação.

A Cambridge Analytica demonstrou-nos claramente que este é um negócio de biliões e, se nada mais fizermos, quem tem o dinheiro continuará a ter o acesso ao poder.


  József Nagy (PPE). – Elnök Úr! A magánélet tiszteletben tartása a fejlett társadalmak egyik legnagyobb vívmánya, a személyes adatok védelme pedig az egyik legfontosabb alapjogunk. Ennek a bebiztosítására elkerülhetetlen megfelelő rendszereket bevezetni, és főleg felügyelni. Még ha csak a jéghegy csúcsát látjuk is, a Facebook és a Cambridge Analytica botránya megmutatta, hogy nem támaszkodhatunk maradéktalanul még a legjobb hírű szolgáltatók önkéntes adatvédelmi rendszerére sem.

Szlovákiában így például 14.000 felhasználó adataival manipuláltak. Az adatvédelem elhanyagolása abban az esetben a társadalmat a legérzékenyebb pontján, a választások befolyásolásával sebezhette meg. Hiába hangoztattuk tavalyi kiküldetésünkön Washingtonban, a Kongresszusban és a Fehér Házban is, hogy az európai adatvédelmi pajzs feltételrendszere az a technológiai minimum, amit globális szinten is meg kellene követelnünk azoktól, akik személyes adatok óriási mennyisége fölött rendelkeznek.

A Cambridge Analytica felháborító esetén is láthatjuk, hogy az adatokkal való kufárkodás nem ismer határokat, s ugyan igaz, hogy mindig lesznek a világon olyan helyek, ahol az adtaüzéreket tolerálhatják, de amíg a szolgáltatók, a rendszerek gazdái, szolgáltatókra, vagy éppen fejlesztő cégekre háríthatják a visszaélésekért a felelősséget, addig csak fokozódni fog a kockázata ezeknek a visszaéléseknek. Mint már sok esetben, itt is a legfontosabb a megelőzés, aminek az alapeszköze lehet az európai adatvédelmi pajzs, a Privacy Shield.


  Josef Weidenholzer (S&D). – Herr Präsident, geschätzte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Als ich am Montag die Zeitung aufschlug, da staunte ich über ein ganzseitiges Inserat von Facebook: „Neue EU—Gesetzgebung bedeutet mehr Datenschutz für dich“, hieß es da. Mir kam so einiges in den Sinn. Hatte nicht gerade ein paar Tage zuvor Mark Zuckerberg – wenig überzeugend – unseren Kollegen im amerikanischen Kongress Rede und Antwort gestanden? Vieles ließ er unbeantwortet. Das lag wohl auch an den Fragenden, denen es am notwendigen Verständnis mangelte. In der Tat ist vieles für alle, die nicht mit der Materie vertraut waren, unfassbar, was da im Zusammenhang mit Facebook und Cambridge Analytica alles bekannt wurde: Wählerbeeinflussung, Datendiebstahl, unfairer Wettbewerb usw.

Man hätte das alles wissen können, hätte man auf die Bedenken der Datenschützer und der Zivilgesellschaft gehört, die schon lange auf den Mangel dieses Geschäftsmodells hingewiesen hatten. Einige von uns haben diese Bedenken ernst genommen. Die Datenschutz—Grundverordnung, um die wir in diesem Haus vor fünf Jahren gerungen haben, hat diese aufgegriffen. Uns schlug damals Ablehnung und Ignoranz entgegen. Ich erinnere mich noch genau an den Moment, als ein Kollege auf meine Behauptung, wir könnten mit unserem Gesetz globale Standards setzen, entgegnete, ob ich das wirklich glauben würde.

Mittlerweile kommen Beobachter der Entwicklung – wie unlängst die Washington Post – zur Erkenntnis, dass die Zukunft von Facebook in Europa entschieden würde. Was bedeutet das? Das bedeutet: Europa ist handlungsfähig – es muss nur den Willen dazu haben.

Vor allem aber dürfen die Nationalstaaten nicht ständig versuchen, Sand in das Getriebe zu streuen. Es reicht allerdings nicht, sich auf den Lorbeeren auszuruhen. Deshalb geht es jetzt darum, dass der Rat die ePrivacy—Verordnung, die notwendig ist, um das Ganze zu vollenden, und die für uns bereits beschlossen wurde, nun nicht mehr länger blockiert und dass die Mitgliedstaaten den Datenschutz endlich lückenlos umsetzen.


  Zdzisław Krasnodębski (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Chciałem zwrócić uwagę na to, że uczestnicy tego skandalu, tego wydarzenia przerzucają się odpowiedzialnością. Cambridge Analytica mówi, że odpowiedzialny jest Facebook, Facebook, że uniwersytet w Cambridge. Uniwersytet w Cambridge mówi, że to sprawa Aleksandra Kogana, a badacz ten mówi, że jest to wina użytkowników. Wydaje mi się, że zawinili w tej sprawie wszyscy, bo my się tu koncentrujemy, drodzy Koledzy, tylko na Facebooku, natomiast wina i oczywiście skala winy jest różna. Facebook od 2006 roku wiedział o problematycznej działalności Cambridge Analytica i innych aplikacji, a dopiero teraz przeprowadzi audyt. Ale inni postanowili przymykać oczy na to, do czego służą akademickie badania – na przykład badania Cambridge Psychometrics Centre nie przechodziły procedury uzyskania zgody Uniwersyteckiej Komisji Etyki. Co więcej, użytkownicy również przekazywali dane swoich znajomych, a więc potrzebne są nie tylko regulacje nakładane na platformy cyfrowe. Potrzebne jest zastanowienie się nad mechanizmem kontroli nad badaniami naukowymi i potrzebna jest również edukacja społeczeństwa.


  Eva Joly (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, le 25 mai, les nouvelles règles européennes de protection des données entrent en vigueur accompagnées des sanctions dignes de ce nom.

Facebook et les autres géants de l’internet doivent comprendre que notre consentement à la collecte de nos données n’est pas négociable, pas plus que notre vie privée n’est à vendre. Le patron de Facebook doit venir s’expliquer devant le Parlement européen. Mark Zuckerberg nous doit autre chose que de simples excuses ou de vagues annonces. Il nous doit des garanties quant au traitement de nos données et davantage de transparence sur l’origine des publicités à des fins politiques.

Une fois de plus, c’est grâce à un lanceur d’alerte, Christopher Wylie, que ce scandale a pu être dévoilé et que les citoyens ont pu être informés. Hier encore, c’est une ancienne cadre de Cambridge Analytica qui révélait que le nombre d’utilisateurs abusés serait bien plus élevé qu’annoncé.

Protégeons les lanceurs d’alerte, protégeons les données personnelles, protégeons toutes celles, tous ceux et toutes choses qui font respirer nos démocraties.


  Martina Anderson (GUE/NGL). – Mr President, it is now clear that the Democratic Unionist Party used a data-mining company, Analytica IQ, during the Brexit campaign, abusing the privacy of tens of thousands of Facebook users.

The company has been called the backroom operation of Cambridge Analytica, the same outfit who helped elect Trump. Because it is based in Canada, Analytica IQ wasn’t subject to the same electoral laws during the referendum. The Open Democracy website has found links between the companies and the Tories, the British military, the DUP and even Russian oligarchs.

This isn’t the first time that the DUP has played fast and loose with the law to pursue their dangerous pro-Brexit agenda. The DUP took almost half a million pounds in dark money from a secret source to manipulate opinion in London, where they have zero votes and zero seats, and they then ensured that the transparency law that was not back-dated to expose their seedy deals.

Mr President, I just want to say that the DUP has no respect for rights, no respect for privacy and absolutely no regard for the damage that their reckless Brexit agenda is doing in Ireland.


  Viviane Reding (PPE). – Mr President, trust is a must. It takes years to build, but only seconds to lose. Sadly, tech giants learned this lesson the hard way – the latest example being the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Fortunately, we Europeans decided on the right laws to bring back trust. Who wants to be part of a global community where algorithms know what you are better than you, than your family, than your friends? Where someone can spy on you anywhere – at work, at home on the streets? Where your political preferences can be matched to the highest bidder? Where you are a product being sold without your consent? Nine in ten Europeans want none of this, and that is exactly why we adopted the General Data Protection Regulation – to put citizens back in control of their own data; to ensure a stronger enforcement and high fines for companies which do not comply; to set data protection standards worldwide.

Six years ago, lobbyists and national governments tried to stop the proposal I had put on the table for a general data protection regulation, and today they agree it is an indispensable piece of legislation: the internet was designed for the people by the people, and that is what it has to stay.


  Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D). – Voorzitter, het schandaal waar we vandaag over spreken met Cambridge Analytica en Facebook doet me in een aantal opzichten denken aan het andere schandaal dat we deze legislatuur al te verwerken hebben gekregen: het dieselgateschandaal. De vergelijkingen zijn daarbij een grote multinational die op een schandalige manier het vertrouwen van de Europeanen en andere mensen in de wereld schaadt. Dat het hier over machtige multinationals gaat, dat moge duidelijk zijn. Het gaat over miljoenen data waarmee ook miljarden verdiend worden.

Je kunt het heel goed zien: in 2006 waren de vijf belangrijkste, grootste en machtigste bedrijven allemaal energie- en oliebedrijven. En vandaag – ik weet niet of dat een goede evolutie is, waarschijnlijk een beetje – zijn dat de Big Five, de grote data- en internetbedrijven. Dat is een beetje het punt dat ik extra wil maken naast het terechte pleidooi voor de e-privacy en de terechte trots die we mogen voelen voor onze eigen reglementering, maar we moeten het ook breder bekijken. Het gaat over iets wat een hele grote en diepe invloed heeft op onze samenleving, het gaat over bedrijven die vandaag niet of nauwelijks belasting betalen en ook dat moet deel van de oplossing worden als we kijken naar dit schandaal.


  Bernd Lucke (ECR). – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Der Skandal, den wir heute diskutieren, schlägt Wellen in der Öffentlichkeit. Aber die Wellen sind noch lange nicht hoch genug. Das liegt daran, dass vielen Bürgern noch immer nicht klar ist, wie umfangreich eigentlich die Daten sind, die durch ihr Nutzerverhalten den Internetkonzernen, den sozialen Medien zur Verfügung gestellt werden und was alles mit diesen Daten gemacht wird.

Und ich glaube, daran müssen wir ansetzen. Wir müssen den Bürgern viel klarer machen, wie stark diese Daten benutzt werden und welche Menge an Daten über Individuen tatsächlich einfach aus dem Nutzerverhalten heraus gesammelt wird. Das können wir nur erreichen, indem wir es den Internetkonzernen, den sozialen Medien auferlegen, dass sie jeden Nutzer regelmäßig darüber informieren, welche Daten genau für diese Nutzer gespeichert sind. Das muss eine Standardsache sein, dass jeder Nutzer das regelmäßig zur Kenntnis nimmt, was von ihm bei diesen Konzernen gespeichert ist. Und es sollte auch dokumentiert werden, welchen Nutzen die Konzerne daraus ziehen und an welche Unternehmen das verkauft wird.

Deshalb kann ich nur sagen: Der Worte sind genug gewechselt, lasst mich jetzt endlich Taten sehen!


  Sven Giegold (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Weltweit nutzen über zwei Milliarden Menschen Facebook, 400 Millionen Menschen in Europa. Dieses Unternehmen ist zur globalen Plattform für Kommunikation, Information und eben auch politische Wahlkämpfe geworden. Anders gesagt: Facebook ist die Infrastruktur der heutigen demokratischen Öffentlichkeit. Und wie das bei jeder Form von Infrastruktur der Fall ist, hat derjenige, der sie baut und die Regeln definiert, auch die Macht darüber, wer am meisten von ihr profitiert. Wenn der Staat eine Straße baut, dann legt er fest, dass alle Autos darauf gleich schnell fahren dürfen. Wenn Facebook seinen Algorithmus ändert, dann entscheidet es oftmals, dass bestimmte Inhalte mehr Aufmerksamkeit bekommen als andere.

In der Informationsgesellschaft ist Wissen Macht, in der algorithmischen Informationsgesellschaft ist digitale Infrastruktur Macht, weil digitale Infrastruktur Wissen bevorzugen oder benachteiligen kann. Es geht deshalb darum, dass die demokratische Gesellschaft entscheidet, nach welchen Regeln die Infrastruktur unserer Informationsgesellschaft funktioniert. Wir brauchen daher eine europäische Digitalaufsicht parallel zur europäischen Bankenaufsicht. Und Sie, liebe Frau Kommissarin, können diesen Vorschlag vorlegen und damit den Bürgern die Kontrolle zurückgeben.


  Christel Schaldemose (S&D). – Hr. formand! Facebook er på mange måder et fantastisk digitalt, socialt netværk, hvor man kan holde forbindelse til familie, venner og gamle kolleger. Men Facebook er også en kæmpe virksomhed med en forretningsmodel, der i den grad udfordrer vores samfund. Når du ikke betaler med penge for adgang til Facebook, er det fordi, du betaler med en anden valuta. I Facebooks tilfælde er du produktet, og valutaen er alle din personlige data. Facebook har i dag fået så stort et omfang, at det ikke alene er et problem for vores privatliv, men også en kæmpe udfordring for vores demokrati. Data indsamles i et omfang, der gør, at selv vores præference ved et parlamentsvalg kan forudsiges. Og kan den forudsiges, kan den også påvirkes. Vores samfund og vores demokrati lider under den måde at drive forretning på. EU bør tage kampen op imod den monopolstatus og den position, Facebook har fået, både for at beskytte borgernes personlige data, men også for at beskytte vores demokrati.


  Peter van Dalen (ECR). – Voorzitter, de grens tussen online en offline vervaagt, dus moeten we extra alert zijn op het gebruik van persoonsgegevens. Facebook is terecht onder vuur komen te liggen, want een vragenlijst van Cambridge Analytica verzamelde persoonsgegevens. Maar niet alleen van de invullers, die hiervoor toestemming hadden gegeven, maar ook van hun Facebook-vrienden werden die gegevens gepakt en die wisten van niets.

In Nederland is vorige week bekend geworden dat zorgbedrijven een Facebookpixel gebruiken om gevoelige informatie te delen met Facebook. Daarom ben ik blij dat volgende maand nieuwe Europese wetgeving in werking treedt. Dan kunnen persoonsgegevens alleen met toestemming van de personen worden gebruikt, en dan is de handhaving cruciaal door Europese instanties en door de Nederlandse.

Overigens ben ik van mening dat de Commissie haar arrogante minachting voor dit Parlement moet afleggen en de benoemingsprocedure voor een nieuwe secretaris-generaal moet overdoen.


  Julia Reda (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, one aspect I am missing so far in this debate is that the Facebook scandal is also a scandal of secrecy. We must demand more transparency about data breaches on the one hand, but more generally about how personalised algorithms work and who is served which customised messages on whose behalf. In a world where information flows are now so personalised that we no longer really have one shared reality, we must make it understandable and investigate how information is spread and who is spreading it.

As we debate regulatory responses to the scandal, here is my proposal: let us regulate advertising targeting. There is an arms race in the industry to collect ever more data, to create ever more precise psychological profiles of users and to move ever closer to outright manipulation – just to secure advertising revenues. Let’s end this arms race and return a share of the advertising market to those whose business model is not based on invading our privacy.


  President. – The truth is that we are consumers either of commercial things or politics so, therefore, you know we have to buy it.


  Agustín Díaz de Mera García Consuegra (PPE). – Señor presidente, el comercio o el mal uso de la minería de datos están provocando graves efectos sobre los procedimientos electorales; permiten tanto la recopilación masiva de información confidencial del electorado como la distribución de noticias falsas generadas para atraer y desinformar. Es necesario que en la Unión se tomen medidas para frenar el mal uso de la minería de datos y la proliferación de noticias falsas.

No se trata de coartar el derecho a la libertad de expresión, sino de un uso responsable de los medios para que la sociedad esté correctamente informada sin ser manipulada. Si no es la Comisión, deben ser los Estados los que tomen la iniciativa legislativa, puesto que así lo permiten los artículos 74 y 76 del Tratado de la Unión. El mal uso de los metadatos es un reto tanto para la democracia como para la ciberseguridad. Es necesario que los actores públicos y privados coordinen sus acciones para evitar casos como los que denunciamos, fortaleciendo la cooperación y la investigación.

La presentación del paquete de ciberseguridad el pasado mes de septiembre es la buena ruta. Hay que impulsar la creación de la agencia europea de ciberseguridad y dotar de recursos a quienes ya velan por ello, que es el EC3 de Europol. Regularización, concienciación de los usuarios, prevención, cooperación y buen uso de los medios es lo necesario para evitar casos como el de Cambridge Analytica y Facebook. Lean, queridos colegas, el informe IOCTA del EC3 de Europol, que es el que habla… (el presidente retira la palabra al orador).


  Nicola Danti (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il caso di Cambridge Analytica e Facebook mostra che le opinioni pubbliche vengono sempre più influenzate attraverso la profilazione dei cittadini e la sponsorizzazione di notizie in rete più o meno false, in modo da favorire partiti e tendenze politiche e manipolare i cittadini nell'espressione del voto.

Questo è avvenuto in Europa. Cambridge Analytica è stata coinvolta nel referendum britannico, nella campagna elettorale francese e nelle ultime elezioni politiche italiane, nostro malgrado, con discreto successo dei suoi clienti. Commissario, non è il momento di risposte timide: in ballo c'è la democrazia, c'è la nostra Europa.

Credo sia necessario allora avviare, nel più breve tempo possibile, delle misure legislative che si traducano in una maggiore responsabilità delle piattaforme, nel controllo della veridicità degli account, nella trasparenza delle transazioni dei dati.

Le prossime elezioni europee sono alle porte, non lasciamo campo libero a quelle forze che, proprio grazie all'utilizzo illecito dei dati, hanno consolidato il proprio consenso.

(L'oratore di rispondere a una domanda "cartellino blu" (articolo 162, paragrafo 8, del regolamento))


  Dobromir Sośnierz (NI), pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki.(początek wystąpienia poza mikrofonem) ... Pan nowego ustawodawstwa w tej sprawie. Chciałem Pana spytać, jakie konkretnie ma Pan pomysły na rozstrzygnięcie tego w drodze ustawodawczej. Czy Pan nie dostrzega problemu polegającego na tym, że jakąkolwiek ustawę się wyda, to ktoś może nielegalnie te dane wydać? Już mamy prawo, które tego zabrania i to nic nie pomaga. Zawsze znajdą się ludzie, którzy je złamią. Powoływanie dodatkowych agencji i jeszcze większa inwigilacja państwa w internet jest jeszcze bardziej niebezpieczna niż manipulacje dokonywane przez prywatne firmy, ponieważ prywatne firmy nie dysponują policją i wojskiem, a państwa dysponują. Więc rządy są dużo bardziej niebezpiecznym organem, który się wtrąca w dane internetowe niż Facebook, dlatego przestrzegam Pana, żeby nie domagać się wtrącania się urzędników jeszcze bardziej w wolność obywateli w internecie.


  Nicola Danti (S&D), risposta a una domanda "cartellino blu". – Ringrazio per la domanda, che mi permette di ampliare un discorso che ho tentato di fare del mio intervento.

Io penso che ci sia la necessità di una maggiore responsabilità delle piattaforme. Le piattaforme sono sempre state considerate dei semplici intermediari; hanno delle responsabilità, devono verificare le persone che sono dietro gli account, che sono molto spesso falsi, di frequente dei computer che rispondono, operano e generano notizie false nella rete.

Io penso che sia necessario sapere chi paga e chi compra i dati dalle piattaforme e per quale motivo vengono utilizzati. Dietro tutto questo non c'è un controllo dello Stato; c'è la libertà e la tutela della democrazia nel nostro continente.


  President. – Maybe a solution would be to accept Facebook only if it is connected to typewriters?


  Ruža Tomašić (ECR). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, protuzakonito stjecanje podataka i invazija privatnosti internet korisnika važan su izazov modernog vremena koji moramo adresirati boljim zakonodavstvom, podizanjem svijesti građana i drastičnim kažnjavanjem svih aktera umiješanih u tu neprihvatljivu praksu.

Više od 80 % europskih kućanstava ima pristup internetu, a redovito ga koristi 71 % građana. Često i ne znajući, izlažu se brojnim predatorima i sigurnosnim prijetnjama. Kao odgovoran zakonodavac moramo učiniti sve da taj rizik smanjimo.

No, želimo li doista biti odgovorni, prestanimo prvo zavaravati sebe i druge. Brexit i Trumpova pobjeda nisu se dogodili zbog Facebooka i Cambridge Analytice, kao ni zbog ruskih hakera. Dogodili su se zato što je politika zapostavila građane i njihove interese i želje.

Nadam se da zaštita građana od izborne manipulacije neće značiti cenzuru nepoćudnih političkih aktera i otežavanje izborne utakmice. To bi ugrozilo našu demokraciju puno više od nepoštenih praksi koje želimo zaustaviti.


  Molly Scott Cato (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, as democrats, we need to recognise the true seriousness of this situation. Our democracies are being stolen by companies who use psychological techniques designed for situations of military conflict to sow division in our societies and distort electoral outcomes to the benefit of the rich and powerful. Those who think that the naive arguments for freedom of speech are sufficient imagine the media landscape as a fairy tale world of Hansel and Gretel, but the Cambridge Analytica scandal shows us that the forest is full of wolves.

For many online today, the distinction between fake news and genuine news is increasingly blurred, and this plays into the hands of those who wish to consolidate power. As Hannah Arendt said, ‘The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction and the distinction between true and false no longer exist’.


  Jeroen Lenaers (PPE). – Voorzitter, Facebook is ineens fan van Europese gegevensbeschermingsregels. De wonderen zijn de wereld nog niet uit. Maar er was wel een groot schandaal voor nodig waarbij gegevens van miljoenen Europese gebruikers op een schandelijke wijze bij een schimmig bedrijf, Cambridge Analytica, terechtkwamen en gebruikt werden in politieke campagnes, zonder dat die mensen daar toestemming voor gegeven hadden en zonder dat ze er überhaupt van op de hoogte waren.

Facebook was er wel van op de hoogte, maar hield twee jaar lang zijn mond. Dat is eigenlijk niet zo verrassend, want ik heb voor de grap nog een keer de reactie van Facebook op die nieuwe regels uit Europa van zo'n zes jaar geleden erbij gepakt en ze zeiden heel duidelijk: “We should have focused on encouraging best practices by companies like Facebook rather than on setting out detailed rules that may be frustrating and costly. Overly prescriptive provisions on consent have an adverse effect on user experience. An overly prescriptive nature of regulation on data-based notification creates a level of bureaucracy that only distracts”. Dat is Facebook zoals we het kennen. Niet te veel gedoe, niet te veel regeltjes, lekker geld verdienen.

Maar nu heeft Mark Zuckerberg sorry gezegd en een prachtige advertentie laten plaatsen in Europese kranten waarin hij reclame maakt voor diezelfde regels. En nu moeten wij hem op zijn blauwe ogen geloven. Ik geloof het niet. Deze knieval is too little, too late. Mark Zuckerberg moet zich hier, in de EU, in dit huis komen verantwoorden en ik verwacht van de Europese toezichthouders dat ze de nieuwe regels waar Facebook zo'n fan van is ineens ook vanaf dag één en keihard op dat bedrijf toepassen.


  Miriam Dalli (S&D). – Jekk xi ħadd qatt kellu xi dubju dwar is-sigurtà tad-data tagħna online, issa għandna l-konferma li hemm kumpaniji li qegħdin jiġbru u jbiegħu l-informazzjoni tagħna lil organizzazzjonijiet differenti. F’pajjiżi, f’Malta, 90 % taċ-ċittadini jużaw is-social media, 6,000 minna kienu fil-mira, imma ma kinux il-Maltin biss. Madwar 2,7 miljun ċittadin Ewropew huma maħsuba li sfaw vittmi. Għalhekk li qegħdin nitolbu lilek, Kummissarju, u lill-Kummissjoni Ewropea biex tkunu b’saħħitkom u tesiġu risposti ċari u diretti minn Facebook u Cambridge Analytica.

Ir-regolamenti dwar il-protezzjoni ġenerali tad-data, iva, huma pass tajjeb, iżda mhumiex biżżejjed f’każ bħal dan għaliex hawnhekk qegħdin nitkellmu dwar il-protezzjoni tal-komunikazzjoni personali u l-privatezza online. Għal każijiet bħal dawn irid ikollna r-Regolament dwar il-Privatezza Elettronika (l-ePrivacy Regulation). L-appell tiegħi lill-Kunsill, lill-Istati Membri: Din hija kwistjoni urġenti. Taslux għal pożizzjoni dgħajfa li tkun ta’ vantaġġ biss għall-kumpaniji l-kbar. Hija r-responsabilità tagħkom li żżommu dan ir-regolament b’saħħtu għall-benefiċċju taċ-ċittadini li tirrappreżentaw u li suppost tridu tipproteġu.


  Carlos Coelho (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, os grandes volumes de dados podem ser o petróleo do séc. XXI, mas entre o ouro negro do século passado e a informação que partilhamos online hoje em dia há uma diferença fundamental. Quando falamos de proteção de dados e de privacidade não estamos a falar de um recurso, mas de um direito fundamental dos cidadãos europeus. Um direito protegido pela Carta dos Direitos Fundamentais e pelas constituições de vários Estados-Membros.

O acesso criminoso da Cambrige Analytica a informações privadas de utilizadores do Facebook é um ataque ao direito fundamental à proteção de dados dos cidadãos europeus que viram a sua privacidade violada. Se é grave, em termos absolutos, em cada um dos quase três milhões de casos na Europa, ainda mais grave se torna quando olhamos para as potenciais consequências.

Quando sabemos que os dados de um milhão e cem mil britânicos foram violados e utilizados para a conceção da campanha pelo Brexit, em que o “leave” venceu por pouco mais do que isso, não podemos deixar de tirar conclusões preocupantes. Se assim foi e se a decisão mais importante das últimas décadas de integração europeia foi influenciada por um crime, estamos perante um atentado contra o Estado de Direito.

É por isso que o Facebook deve explicações a este Parlamento. É por isso que a Comissão não pode deixar de agir. E é por isso que os cidadãos não podem ignorar os seus direitos, que serão reforçados com a entrada em vigor do Regulamento Geral de Proteção de Dados.

(O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta "cartão azul" (n.º 8 do artigo 162.º)).


  Liisa Jaakonsaari (S&D), sinisen kortin kysymys. – On hieno asia, että Euroopan parlamentissa vallitsee näin laaja yksimielisyys tarttua tähän asiaan, ja erittäin tyytyväinen olen komissaari Jourováan, joka esimerkiksi mainitsi algoritmit yhtenä tekijänä valeuutisten leviämiseen.

Minä kysyisin Teiltä, että oletteko Te valmis lisäämään algoritmien avoimuutta, koska ne ovat liikesalaisuuksia. Niissähän törmätään ehdottomasti juuri kovan bisneksen ja kansalaisen välisiin etuihin.


  Carlos Coelho (PPE), Resposta segundo o procedimento "cartão azul". – Muito obrigado pela questão que coloca. Vamos ser claros, não podemos voltar para o século passado e é evidente que a informação é poder e que a informação com regras pode ser negócio. Não estou contra isso.

O que estou contra é a utilização de dados pessoais sem autorização das pessoas. Cada um de nós é proprietário dos seus dados e isso é que é importante salvaguardar. Nós temos legislação europeia que vai entrar em vigor, temos que garantir que todos aqueles que intervêm sobre o mercado europeu cumpram essa legislação.


  Silvia Costa (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il clamoroso caso Facebook e Cambridge Analytica rivela alcune cose. La prima è l'inaccettabilità di modelli di business che sono parassitari e pervasivi insieme, basati sull'acquisizione di dati personali, venduti o pubblicizzati a società di marketing per influenzare le elezioni, come è avvenuto, è stato detto, nel caso della Brexit, in USA e in Italia. Vorrei ricordare che 200 000 nominativi italiani sono stati oggetto di una denuncia del Garante italiano per la privacy.

Bene, che a settant'anni dalla Dichiarazione universale dei diritti umani, l'Europa oggi sia sulla frontiera dei diritti umani digitali, con un regolamento che ci fa onore. Ma serve coerenza. Primo, serve il regolamento per l'e-privacy. Secondo, credo che ci sia bisogno, sotto tutti i profili, di avere un coraggio maggiore nel definire le responsabilità delle social platform anche per quanto riguarda i contenuti di odio e d'istigazione, istigazione talvolta al suicidio – e penso al bullismo – e anche di tutto quell'assoluto abuso di potere e di posizione dominante che si ha anche nei confronti di altri ambiti. Terzo, una maggiore collaborazione tra le autorità europee, da facilitare per la Commissione, quelle che proteggono i dati, i consumatori e la concorrenza: vanno viste in una visione molto più integrata.


  Michał Boni (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Skandal Cambridge Analytica i Facebooka może być lekcją fiaska i utraty reputacji, albo stać się lekcją szansy. Jakiej szansy? Nigdy wcześniej na taką skalę nie mówiono o ochronie prywatności w internecie – że to ważne dla każdego, że rodzi niełatwą odpowiedzialność za zarządzanie własnymi danymi, że trzem milionom poszkodowanych Europejczyków pomożemy.

Nigdy wcześniej nie podkreślano z takim szacunkiem, jakim osiągnięciem jest rozporządzenie o ochronie danych osobowych – harmonizujące na szczeblu europejskim zasady ochrony prywatności, dające użytkownikom kluczowe narzędzie – wyrażenie zgody na przetwarzanie danych.

Choć wdrożenie tych reguł ocenimy dopiero za kilka miesięcy, nigdy wcześniej nie mówiono europejskiej legislacji prywatności jako referencyjnym odniesieniu dla całego świata. Nigdy wcześniej nie pojawiła się taka presja, by reklamowanie w sieci miało jasne i twarde reguły, szczególnie gdy wiąże się z polityczną promocją, tak by nie wplątywać internetu w ciemne strony walki politycznej – szczególnie nie manipulować wyborami i finansować ich w nieprzejrzysty sposób. Nigdy wcześniej tak mocno nie wymagano od platform zdefiniowanej przejrzyście odpowiedzialności za zamieszczane tam treści, wykorzystywanie danych i mikronamierzanie.

Co ta szansa przyniesie? Wzmocni najcenniejszą wartość dla rozwoju internetu – zaufanie – pod warunkiem, że wszystko, co dziś mówimy, wdrożymy z żelazną konsekwencją.

(Mówca zgodził się odpowiedzieć na pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki (art. 162 ust. 8 Regulaminu))




  Catherine Stihler (S&D), blue-card question. – Mr Boni, you said about how this is an opportunity as well. Obviously, we are horrified with what happened with Cambridge Analytica – especially being a British MEP in the aftermath of Brexit and what this means we will be looking into. But you said something important about how we can look at our personal responsibility, and one of the things I have been working on with public libraries is the role public libraries can have in helping our citizens know about how to protect their own personal data. I draw the House’s attention to the work of the Carnegie trust on this.

Mr Boni, would you agree with me that public libraries can provide us with a tool, a neutral public space where we can get people to understand about their privacy and about their data?


  Michał Boni (PPE), odpowiedź na pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Dziękuję bardzo za to pytanie. Ja uważam, że wejście w życie rozporządzenia o ochronie danych osobowych jest wielką szansą, żebyśmy uczyli się świadomości zarządzania naszymi własnymi danymi, bo my tak potocznie mówimy: „będziemy wyrażać zgodę i to rozwiąże problem”. To nie będzie takie łatwe, dlatego że będzie wymagało od nas świadomości, uzmysłowienia sobie, jakie korzyści możemy stracić, nie zgadzając się na pewne rzeczy. I cała sieć instytucji publicznych łącznie z bibliotekami, które mogą odegrać wielką rolę w budowaniu takiej świadomości cyfrowej, powinna być w to włączona.


  Dan Nica (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisar, astăzi știm că sunt 2,7 milioane de cetățeni europeni ale căror date au fost folosite în mod fraudulos. Ceea ce ne îngrijorează foarte mult este faptul că suntem departe de ceea ce unii colegi au numit în mod greșit „vârful aisbergului”, pentru un motiv foarte simplu: pentru că aceste date provin doar de la un singur dezvoltator – Cambridge Analytica – și încă mai sunt de comunicat de către Facebook datele celorlalți dezvoltatori, pentru a afla cât de multe alte milioane de date au fost folosite incorect și, mai ales, foarte îngrijorător, ce s-a întâmplat cu datele celor care nu sunt utilizatori de Facebook și cărora le-au fost, de asemenea, colectate datele.

Deci cred că dumneavoastră, doamnă comisar, aveți o obligație mare, și anume să le comunicați cetățenilor europeni ce s-a întâmplat cu datele care le-au fost furate, deci acele date utilizate în mod incorect, dacă au fost șterse și unde se află ele și, în al doilea rând, dacă alegerile de anul viitor, doamnă comisar, se vor desfășura corect - alegerile pentru Parlamentul European.

Și vreau să știu că ceea ce s-a întâmplat în România la alegerile prezidențiale din 2014 nu se va mai putea întâmpla anul viitor în țara mea și că alegerile în general în Uniunea Europeană se vor desfășura liber, corect și departe de această influență malefică a psihometriei promovată de Cambridge Analytica și Facebook ... (Președinta a întrerupt vorbitorul)


  Heinz K. Becker (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin! Von dieser Stelle im Europäischen Parlament wende ich mich an Sie, Mister Zuckerberg, der Sie mit Ihrer grundsätzlich sehr positiven Plattform Facebook wieder schwerwiegendste Probleme für die Menschen in Europa und in der ganzen Welt schaffen. „Wieder“ deshalb, weil Sie schon in der Vergangenheit mit Hasspostings und mit Terrorpostings nicht verantwortungsvoll umgegangen sind. Der Fall Cambridge Analytica zeigt glasklar, welche negativen Folgen dieser Missbrauch haben kann.

Ich glaube, es ist evident: Mister Zuckerberg, Sie sind in der Pflicht, und wir in der Politik müssen die Abermillionen Menschen schützen, die Opfer von gezielten Aktionen werden können, deren Hintergrund sie selbst gar nicht erkennen, denn Sie sind im Besitz der psychologischen Profile von Menschen in einer Qualität, die die Menschen oft selbst nicht kennen.

Es bringt enorme Risiken bis hin zur Wahlmanipulation. Und ich glaube, die Europawahl im nächsten Jahr zeigt eine Gefahr: Wenn Facebook es Cambridge Analytica ermöglicht, dann wird es auch dem russischen Geheimdienst möglich sein, diese missbräuchlichen Verbrechen zu begehen.

Daher: Stellen Sie sich dem Europäischen Parlament. Kommen Sie und antworten Sie auf unsere Fragen – jetzt!


  Carlos Zorrinho (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, o uso abusivo de dados do Facebook exige uma resposta forte no plano das regras e no plano ético. O exemplo da proteção de dados mostra que a União Europeia ganha quando antecipa. Quando somos pioneiros podemos liderar e esta é uma oportunidade para recuperarmos uma voz relevante na globalização digital, com uma aposta tecnológica forte e com uma diferenciação pelos valores, afirmando a nossa identidade digital, própria, ética, justa e confiável.

A diferenciação pelos valores e pela tradução nas soluções jurídicas e tecnológicas é o caminho que proponho para responder ao desafio com que nos confrontarmos.

A proteção do direito dos cidadãos e a transparência democrática fazem parte da nossa matriz de valores partilhados. Por isso, devemos exigir que as plataformas que atuam no mercado europeu englobem nos seus modelos e algoritmos os valores partilhados que configuram a identidade digital europeia.

O debate em torno dos dados alertou um maior número de cidadãos europeus para o tema. São precisas respostas tecnológicas e políticas convincentes. É tempo de valorizar a identidade digital europeia.


  Geoffroy Didier (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, avec plus de deux milliards de personnes inscrites dans le monde entier, Facebook constitue la base de données la plus fournie qui n’ait jamais existé.

La situation actuelle est claire: notre vie privée, nos données personnelles, notre intimité virtuelle ne nous appartiennent même plus. Elles sont devenues de facto la propriété de quelques entreprises qui en profitent pour instrumentaliser ces données à des fins commerciales. Nous ne sommes plus seulement des consommateurs, nous sommes devenus des produits à vendre.

J’ai saisi la Commission européenne afin que Cambridge Analytica et Facebook soient sanctionnées financièrement.

J’ai conscience que la nouvelle législation sur la protection des données personnelles est une première étape, salutaire et nécessaire, mais elle n’est pas suffisante. Je propose par conséquent que nous allions plus loin en exigeant tout d’abord de ces plateformes qu’elles ne puissent plus utiliser les données à des fins commerciales mais qu’elles ne puissent plus, non plus, récolter, stocker, conserver durablement ces données personnelles. Les plateformes sont certes les véhicules de ces données, c’est la règle du jeu, mais il n’y a aucune raison qu’elles en deviennent les exploitants et encore moins les propriétaires.

Je vous propose, je nous propose que nous fixions dès aujourd’hui notre propre frontière personnelle parce que demain, ce sera trop tard.


  Antanas Guoga (PPE). – Madam President, there is some good news in this situation: that we have implemented GDPR and are going to be leading the world forward in protecting people’s fundamental rights: their data, their privacy. Facebook has failed us miserably, has failed the whole world miserably, and we need to bring in Mark Zuckerberg here at the European Parliament to answer very serious questions as soon as possible.

We are worried what happened with Brexit. Was it Facebook’s fault? These are very important questions to be urgently answered by Facebook. Cambridge Analytica, and perhaps others, are cooperating and using our data to work against our interests. This is very important, so we should be very stringent. We should keep analysing and doing everything we can to stop fake news and to stop leakage of our data for fake news to be empowered to change election results and to destroy our democracy.

Let’s be vigilant, let’s be brave, and let’s make this happen.


  Nuno Melo (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, o Facebook não é só uma empresa americana. Opera no mercado mundial, muitos milhares de utilizadores, para não dizer milhões, são europeus, é realmente uma empresa global. Nessa medida, Mark Zuckerberg não deve uma explicação apenas ao Congresso norte-americano. Deve uma explicação ao Parlamento Europeu.

Dizer-se que só adere ao Facebook quem quer é, no mínimo, ridículo, quando não, o pior dos argumentos porque o Facebook na verdade não tem concorrência, não dá alternativa. Seria mais ou menos como dizer-se que só tem eletricidade em casa quem quer. Obviamente que as pessoas precisam de eletricidade e os meios de comunicação à escala global são hoje uma inevitabilidade e este escândalo é de uma gravidade que não se resolve com um simples pedido de desculpas.

A utilização e a manipulação de dados pessoais para a obtenção de objetivos políticos sem autorização consciente dos visados são inadmissíveis num Estado democrático e num Estado de Direito. Nessa medida, a confissão da utilização dos dados de 87 milhões de utilizadores do Facebook, mas não apenas do Facebook, para influenciar campanhas em todo o mundo, simplesmente não pode acontecer. Não pode acontecer nos Estados Unidos da América, não pode acontecer certamente na Europa. E nós, que somos políticos, e nós que vamos a votos em 2019, somos os primeiros a dever assegurar que assim não se voltará a repetir.


  Anna Maria Corazza Bildt (PPE). – Madam President, great commercial power must come with great responsibility, since platforms like Facebook deal with people, not goods. In Europe we stand up for the highest standards of civil liberties. Access to and use of personal data must be transparent and follow our privacy rules. Red lines are crossed when it affects our democracy, influencing elections and spreading fake news.

The time has come for platforms to take responsibility for the content published by users – in particular concerning children, privacy and safety. As the Facebook and Google child summit is under way right now, as a co—chair of the Intergroup on Children’s Rights, I reiterate my call to the ICT community to invest more in finding innovative solutions to protect children online. I welcome the new measures on parental control but, to be effective, age verification tools must be put in place. Much is done to combat child sexual abuse online, but much more needs to be done. An entire generation of young people is affected by hate speech and cyber bullying. A girl victim of revenge pornography or sex extortion must be able to have her pictures taken down. These crimes can lead children to commit self-harm and suicide. Much more also needs to be done urgently to prevent young people from being radicalised and recruited by terrorists on social media.

I call on platforms to strengthen the reporting of abuse, speed up the removal of illegal content and increase cooperation with law enforcement authorities. I support President Tajani’s call to Mark Zuckerberg for a hearing with Parliament to tell us what Facebook is up to.



  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Paní předsedající, otázka úniku osobních dat z Facebooku možná paradoxně pomohla k tomu, že lidé zpozorněli a uvědomili si, že mají také větší odpovědnost oni osobně, ale také stát a Evropská unie. Vzhledem k tomu, jaký mají sociální sítě vliv na myšlení lidí, existuje zde velké riziko pro naši demokracii a svobodné rozhodování. Za velmi vážný problém považuji zneužívání dat pro dezinformační kampaně zejména Ruska, ale také dalších států, které tak ovlivňují výsledky voleb a politického dění v západních zemí i v EU. Ale to nelze brát na lehkou váhu a je třeba posilovat orgány EU, které se tímto zabývají. Například StratCom se svým rozpočtem 1,5 milionu EUR a malým týmem lidí nemůže čelit dezinformačnímu průmyslu, který podporuje Rusko. Jsem tedy velmi vděčná za to, že předseda Tajani pozval Marka Zuckerberga do Evropského parlamentu. Měl by zde vystoupit a sdělit, co udělá proti tomu, aby se nemohlo opakovat zneužívání dat uživatelů Facebooku. Evropská unie, naši občané mají více účtů než Spojené státy, takže je na místě, aby zde vysvětlil, jaké budou další kroky. Je také správné, paní komisařko, že jednáte s Facebookem a vedete tuto společnost k větší odpovědnosti a k tomu, aby přijala jasná opatření.


Interventions à la demande


  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Madam President, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to speak, as I was the PPE rapporteur for the Data Protection Regulation. I worked on it for three years and it is now coming into operation on 25 May. Indeed, in some respects, this scandal is timely, because it brings people’s attention to it.

Secondly, two weeks ago I was part of a seven-strong delegation of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) to Silicon Valley, where Facebook met us at short notice and we discussed this very topic. They outlined to us what happened and what they are doing to ensure that such a scandal won’t happen in the future.

We also reiterated President Tajani’s request to them for their CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, to come to the European Parliament. I think he should come, if only for the fact that they have 50% more clients in Europe than in the USA – 364 million in Europe, 239 million in the USA plus Canada – and also to show us what they’re doing regarding apps, algorithms, authentication, an independent commission, etc.

Finally, I just want to say that their headquarters in Europe are in Ireland, and the government in Ireland are giving far more resources to ensure the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is properly monitored in the European Union.


  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Madam President, the very first day the whole scandal came out, the European Data Protection Supervisor told us, the committee members: ‘it’s much bigger than you know’. And it was. It’s about fundamental rights, privacy awareness, but privacy enforcement as well: namely, the right to be forgotten, enshrined by the GDPR. But it is also about democracy, because fake news is a hybrid war of intoxication, manipulation, lies and hate speech aimed to weaken democracy through interfering in elections and enhancing populism and Europhobia. So it takes a European response, which means that no Member State can do it on its own before a giant in the internet, like Facebook, but also legal, binding and effective law. But it takes action. That means that doing nothing is not a choice.

That is what the European citizens are expecting from all of us, and that is precisely and exactly what we ask from you. The European Commission must take initiative: action and now.


  Pavel Telička (ALDE). – Madam President, I think there is a high degree of consensus in this House, which is rare, but I think that the issue requires that to be the case. I think that clearly there are systemic issues related to data protection. Clearly there are criminal issues which concern Facebook ethically, but there is also a question of a business model.

But one element, while it has been mentioned, did not dominate today’s debate, and I think it is absolutely crucial, because the very fundamentals of our democracy might have been affected. This is the engagement intervention into elections, most likely throughout EU Member States. I would say that this is serious and something that we need to know more about. I want to know more about who the clients were, what the business really entailed and, if we all want to know that, I think that we need to take measures to find out, as sensitive and explosive as it may be.


  Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE). – Senhora Presidente, onde, como, quando, com quem falas, o que pensas e em quem votas? O Facebook sabe tudo da nossa vida, desejos e amizades. Porque a tecnologia não é neutra: controla, manipula, espia nos bastidores do mundo das redes sociais.

O escândalo da transferência de dados do Facebook para a Cambridge Analytica não permite desculpas do Facebook. Atenta contra a democracia, contra o nosso direito fundamental à privacidade dos dados, controlando-nos a ideologia para propaganda eleitoral e controlando também diversos povos, como o povo palestino ou o povo curdo quando se permite que Facebook feche determinadas portais e plataformas.

Não é aceitável que a informação privada seja partilhada e, o pior, que seja vendida. A intimidade como business é uma nova forma de poder deste capitalismo global, uma ingerência antidemocrática e nós, europeus e europeias, não devemos calar-nos.


  Τάκης Χατζηγεωργίου (GUE/NGL). – Κύρια Πρόεδρε, νομίζω ότι όλα τα καταγγελτικά έχουν ήδη λεχθεί και δεν θα επαναλάβω κάτι. Ας δούμε τι μπορούμε να κάνουμε. Υπάρχουν πάρα πολλά εκατομμύρια fake profiles αλλά νομίζω ότι αυτά είναι τα πιο εύκολα να καταργηθούν αφού, αν χρησιμοποιηθεί η ίδια μέθοδος που χρησιμοποιούν όταν προσπαθείς να δημιουργήσεις μια ηλεκτρονική διεύθυνση και σου ζητούν χίλια στοιχεία, τότε δεν θα μπορείς να έχεις ένα fake profile. Δεύτερο, θέλω να μπορώ να σβήσω το λογαριασμό μου άμεσα, εύκολα και να είμαι βέβαιος ότι δεν παραμένει τίποτα σε κάποια άλλα αρχεία. Τρίτον, πρέπει να μπορώ να σβήσω μια ανάρτηση και πάλι να είμαι βέβαιος ότι αυτή η ανάρτηση δεν μένει κάπου αλλού και, το τελευταίο που έχω να πω, εκπλήσσομαι από την έκπληξή μας για να είμαι ειλικρινής. Τώρα μάθαμε ότι τα μέσα κοινωνικής δικτύωσης χρησιμοποιούνται από πολιτικές δυνάμεις και από τις δυνάμεις του χρήματος για να επηρεάσουν τους πολίτες στις εκλογές; Βεβαίως εδώ έχει ξεπεραστεί και κάθε όριο φαντασίας, όμως νομίζω ότι μία μέθοδος μόνο υπάρχει και ότι οι θεσμοί, οι νόμοι και εμείς μπορούμε να συμβάλουμε σε αυτό, ώστε να ελέγχεται αυτό το κοινωνικό δίκτυο.


  Γεώργιος Επιτήδειος (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, μία από τις σημαντικές παρενέργειες της ψηφιακής τεχνολογίας είναι η δυνατότητά της να παρεμβαίνει παρανόμως στην ιδιωτική ζωή των ανθρώπων στο Διαδίκτυο και να παραβιάζει έτσι τα ατομικά τους δικαιώματα. Το σκάνδαλο της Cambridge Analytica απέδειξε ότι τα στοιχεία των χρηστών του Facebook είναι δυνατόν να χρησιμοποιηθούν για οικονομικούς, εμπορικούς και κυρίως πολιτικούς λόγους. H κατάσταση γίνεται ακόμη πιο πολύπλοκη και σοβαρή όταν αυτά τα στοιχεία γίνουν κτήμα τρομοκρατών αλλά και μυστικών υπηρεσιών. Σας υπενθυμίζω ότι, προ διετίας περίπου, η CIA ευχαρίστησε επισήμως τους χρήστες του Facebook διότι με τις αναρτήσεις τους της έδωσαν τέτοιες και τόσες πληροφορίες που για να τις αποκτήσει θα χρειαζόταν να πληρώνει επί μεγάλο χρονικό διάστημα μεγάλο αριθμό πρακτόρων. Τα κράτη βεβαίως κάνουν κάθε προσπάθεια για να προστατεύσουν τους πολίτες, όμως εμείς έχουμε μεγάλο μερίδιο ευθύνης και πρέπει να προσέχουμε τι αναρτούμε και κυρίως που δίνουμε τα προσωπικά μας δεδομένα.


  Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Aby nie było wątpliwości – od razu powiem że jestem i użytkownikiem, i zwolennikiem Facebooka, Twittera, tak samo jak telefonu komórkowego. To są zdobycze cywilizacji – trudno z nich nie korzystać. Natomiast daleki jestem od takiej naiwności, która pojawia się także na tej sali – że są to narzędzia, które służą tylko dobru. Są to także instrumenty – krótko mówiąc – inwigilacji. Nie wierzę przy tym w żadne regulacje prawne, które zabezpieczą w stu procentach ochronę danych osobowych, interesu indywidualnego użytkownika.

Ale czy to oznacza, że powinniśmy się poddać? Zdecydowanie nie. Natomiast co dla mnie jest istotne? Nie ufając entuzjastom, osobom naiwnym, które patrzą w internet i w te narzędzia tylko i wyłącznie poprzez pryzmat korzyści, powiem, że to co jest dziś kluczowe, to zbudowanie właściwej hierarchii celów: bezpieczeństwa fizycznego, bezpieczeństwa życia i zdrowia dzieci, jak i również ochrona instytucji prawa, w tym samych wyborów. Powinniśmy te wartości chronić w pierwszej kolejności.


  Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, dopo lo scandalo di Cambridge Analytica il Congresso americano ha ascoltato il CEO di Facebook sui nuovi diritti ai tempi di Internet e dobbiamo dare atto all'Amministrazione americana di aver trattato lo scandalo Cambridge Analytica con la necessaria serietà ed urgenza.

Ma c'è bisogno di imprimere una svolta al rapporto tra legislatore e nuovi media, tornando ad assumere un ruolo di guida in ambiti spesso considerati intoccabili. Durante le audizioni l'Europa è stata citata come esempio virtuoso, come un giusto bilanciamento tra libertà d'impresa e tutela dei dati personali.

Tra poco più di un mese entrerà in vigore il nuovo GDPR, un regolamento generale sulla privacy frutto di anni di lavoro e compromessi, finalmente in grado di rispondere alle esigenze di trasparenza, comprensibilità e controllo nell'utilizzo di dati personali di tutti i cittadini.

Ma se l'Europa sta tracciando la rotta per il futuro della privacy in Internet, è fondamentale e opportuno che Facebook riferisca in questo Parlamento, nel Parlamento europeo, e qualora venissero accertate interferenze rilevanti nelle elezioni anche ai governi degli Stati membri direttamente coinvolti.


  Igor Šoltes (Verts/ALE). – Gospa predsednica, Seveda gre za velik škandal, hudo zlorabo podatkov, vendar je primer Facebook samo vrh ledene gore, pravzaprav samo odprta Pandorina skrinja, ki je pokazala preprosto na to, kakšno silno moč imajo te digitalne platforme, kako pravzaprav lahko močno vplivajo na družbena dogajanja, tudi na volitve. In pravzaprav, kako lahko usmerjajo demokratične procese in demokracijo samo, in pravzaprav lahko ustvarijo tako imenovano virtualno demokracijo, ki jo potem lahko samo sledimo.

In ravno zato je potrebno to veliko moč tudi omejiti, zato je dobro, da imamo tudi to uredbo o varstvu osebnih podatkov. Vendar ta uredba sama po sebi ne more nadomestiti tudi tako imenovane poslovne etike in pa seveda tudi družbene odgovornosti podjetij. Zato seveda so ustrezne in potrebne tudi ustrezne sankcije in tudi v tem primeru je nujno potrebno na tem področju ustrezno reagirati.


  Luke Ming Flanagan (GUE/NGL). – Madam President, the bottom line is that Facebook, or any similar company, should not be able to sell our data. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is an excellent start. An area like this is a perfect example of where European countries in the European Union should work very closely together, more so than concentrating on creating a European army. Areas like this and food sovereignty are exactly what we should be doing.

When it comes to accountability, given the amount of customers – and who is the customer here? We’re the product obviously – we need Mr Zuckerberg to come before the relevant committees and to answer questions.

There are many, many positives to Facebook. When I think of Facebook, I think of it as a tool for democracy. I wouldn’t be here but for it. I wouldn’t have gotten canvassers together but for it. My work here would not be covered in my country but for Facebook, because I and many others are ignored by our national broadcaster. There are many positives. We need to focus on them, but we need to solve this big problem too.


  John Howarth (S&D). – Madam President, I share the disgust of the public at the abuses by Cambridge Analytica and the proper false propaganda that was peddled during the 2016 referendum. I also share the disgust that many of these organisations exempt themselves for tax. There is a clear need for an inquiry in this place, and I support that call. But looking forward, it’s all very easy for politicians to bash the likes of Facebook, but the reality is we need new regulations and a new mind-set of the type Mr Giegold alluded to earlier. This is about people’s daily lives and their ability to shop, to go to the bank, to interact and to play, and if governments force people to do things like put their tax returns on line, we need to recognise that cyberspace is public space – it isn’t a techie elite any more – and public space needs regulation of behaviour in that space. It will not do simply to say that is too difficult: we need serious legislation that looks to the future.


  Maria Gabriela Zoană (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, trăim într-o lume în care socializarea a devenit un must. Auzim deseori expresia „dacă nu ești pe Facebook, nu exiști” și tinerii vizitatori care urmăresc ședința noastră astăzi pot confirma acest lucru. Această expresie, dincolo de scopul ei comercial, a adus 370 de milioane de utilizatori europeni pe platforma de socializare, unul dintre aceștia fiind chiar eu, alături de majoritatea colegilor mei din sală.

Socializăm. Ceea ce nu este un lucru rău, dar trebuie să fim siguri că datele noastre cu caracter personal sunt protejate de către orice societate comercială sau instituție care are acces la ele. Aștept cu nerăbdare ca Mark Zuckerberg să dea explicații Parlamentului European cu privire la modalitatea în care au fost utilizate datele cetățenilor europeni de către Facebook în contextul scandalului Cambridge Analytica și cred că noi, europenii, merităm răspunsuri, la fel cum am văzut că s-a întâmplat și în Congresul american. Nu numai datele americanilor au fost luate sau lezate și puse în pericol, ci și ale europenilor, iar Zuckerberg trebuie să înțeleagă importanța clarificării tuturor aspectelor, nu numai pe continentul american, ci și în Europa. În aceste circumstanțe și până la apariția unei platforme de socializare europene, care să înlocuiască Facebook, așa cum a apărut în presă, și în potențialul căreia...

(Președinta a întrerupt vorbitoarea)


  Ana Gomes (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, com este escândalo os cidadãos acordam para os tremendos riscos a par de oportunidades abertas pela dependência digital da economia e de todo o atual modo de vida, Facebook, big data, Internet das coisas, inteligência artificial, estão em causa direitos fundamentais e eleições genuínas, segurança das infraestruturas, etc.

Desta vez a Europa está à frente com o RGPD, prestes a entrar em vigor e com alcance global. Tarda o regulamento sobre a e-Privacy no Conselho. Facebook, Cambridge Analytica, Palantir e outras empresas fazem dinheiro à custa da nossa privacidade além de emprestarem os algoritmos a fitos mais que sinistros, de manipulação e discriminação social e política.

Têm concorrentes chineses e russos a que pouco hoje ligam para futuro pesadelo. Quebrar monopólios e impedir e sancionar pesadamente usos perversos contra os cidadãos e a democracia, fazer plataformas digitais e publicidade direcionada, pagarem impostos é mais do que desígnio europeu: importa para salvar o controlo democrático e humanidade na era globalizada. A Comissão tem de atuar, e já.


  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisar, în primul rând, este foarte bine că discutăm acest subiect aici. Eu cred că trebuie să îl tratăm în mod realist. Aici nu este responsabilă o singură parte. Nu numai Comisia poate să rezolve, nu numai autoritățile naționale, sigur, și noi cetățenii. Dar eu mă întreb: ce așteptăm să ne spună în plus directorul Facebook, când a spus-o foarte senin în Congresul american: „OK, eu am creat Facebook-ul, dar nu am făcut niciun sistem de protecție și chiar și datele mele sunt luate”. Suntem în era digitalizării. Vindem pe internet. În momentul în care noi punem condiții în piața internă, să avem siguranța produsului sau a serviciului pe care îl achiziționăm, de ce nu putem să impunem și acestor platforme și acestor mari operatori pe internet să ne asigure că nu vând datele personale și le protejează? Iar dacă nu fac asta și se întâmplă așa cum s-a întâmplat acum, să fie un procent foarte mare din cifra de afaceri, să îi determinăm să respecte regulile nu numai de etică, ci și de siguranță, pentru că aici vorbim de democrație, de subminarea democrației.


  Emilian Pavel (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, sunt inginer IT și am cerut în grupul meu social-democrat o comisie specială pentru acest caz. Nu am obținut, am obținut însă invitarea domnului Zuckerberg din partea celor patru comisii de a veni în plen. Trebuie să vină și trebuie să dea explicații, dar până atunci vă provoc. Ieri, Facebook mă anunța că peste 50 de aplicații folosesc datele mele cu caracter personal, unele și-au pierdut acest drept, altele încă le foloseau. Le-am șters pe toate, le-am șters dreptul de a folosi acele date, dar Facebook, tot Facebook, tardiv, mă anunța că aceste companii s-ar putea să fi dat mai departe aceste date. Le voi cere și acelor companii să îmi spună cui au dat datele și să mă șteargă din baza lor de date. Dar aceasta o voi face după 25 mai, pentru că după 25 mai intră în vigoare GDPR, acest GDPR care este lăudat acum la nivel mondial și care îmi dă dreptul de a fi uitat.

Vă încurajez să faceți la fel, dar vă încurajez și pe dumneavoastră, doamnă comisar, să ne transmiteți lista cu companiile care au procedat la fel ca Facebook, care au procedat precum Cambridge Analytica și să mergem pe fir până la cei care au folosit aceste date în mod ilicit.


(Fin des interventions à la demande)


  Věra Jourová, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, this debate clearly shows that we are on the same page with the conviction that we do not want to have this in Europe and that we do not want to continue such practices or allow such practices to continue. We have the obligation to do everything possible to stop such practices which we see in this Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal.

We don’t want Europeans to be an easy-to-manipulate crowd. We want Europeans to be people who are responsible in regard to their private data and who deserve protection. I myself removed my Facebook account two years ago. Many people, including my PR advisers, told me that ‘as a politician, you will be dead without Facebook’. I’m still quite alive.

However, there are many people in this hall and also in the audience, and I am sure that the majority of young people here are on Facebook. Again, it’s our obligation to protect them and to invite them to protect themselves, to understand why the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is here and what the new rights are that they will enjoy after 25 May 2018.

I want to say a few words on how our work on this matter will continue now. We will have several inputs for continuation of the work. One thing that we will do is the analysis of where we are with regard to electoral law in the Member States. In other words, whether our Member States are equipped in their legislation against aggressive marketing, a method of targeted marketing which abuses the access to people’s private data. I am absolutely convinced that conducting marketing based on illegal practices, using abused or stolen data, must be illegal. However, we have to check where we are and whether the authorities are able to enforce the ban on this practice in all the Member States. We do not know yet.

Another input will be the results of the investigations which, are ongoing in Ireland and in the UK. There may be some more states launching the investigations later if it is revealed that this practice was used in more Member States.

Another very important input will be how the people approach this, whether the affected Europeans will raise their voices and say clearly that they do not want to be objects of manipulation. I expect quite an interesting debate, not only in the European Union, but also in the United States. If this case could be good for something, it would be opening the eyes of Americans as well, who are more relaxed about their privacy than Europeans.

Another input for our continued work on this could be the opinion of the Heads of State, because it might be put on their tables at the May European Council. It’s not decided yet, but this is such a big deal that the Heads of State will want to discuss this.

Based on these inputs, the Commission will reflect on this case in the coming communication on fake news, and here I will have to disappoint everyone who thinks that we will come up with some kind of censorship. This is not what the Commission is planning. We want to come up with workable solutions to fight against disinformation in the EU, and it is very appropriate to include some lessons learned from this scandal in this paper.

We will reflect on this case in the Digital Single Market report, which will also come in May. We will deal with the issue of algorithms and communication focused on artificial intelligence, also to be adopted in spring this year. And, of course, we will take this as a lesson for the continued negotiations on e-privacy. This is all the work we have ahead of us. I will be fully available for continued debate with you in the European Parliament.

Let me thank you, to conclude, for a very interesting debate with many inspirational points. We will work with it, and I’m looking forward to future debates on this Facebook case and on other things related to the digital sphere.


  Monika Panayotova, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, I would like, first of all, to respond to the remarks made and questions raised by honourable Members during this lively debate.

Regarding the remarks made by Ms Rodrigues, Mr Albrecht and Mr Moraes concerning ePrivacy, I would like to say that this is a priority file for the Council as this is one of the key initiatives for enhancing trust and security in the digital single market. The Council supports its objective to ensure a high level of protection of privacy in electronic communication, and we have been working intensively in order to ensure solid progress on the file.

Considering the political and technical complexity of this file and the fact that it takes the form of a directly applicable regulation, it is clear that adequate time is needed for a detailed analysis of all the implications, keeping in mind the overall timeline for the adoption of the digital single market files. The Bulgarian Presidency is firmly committed to advancing the work towards the Council’s negotiating position, with a view to starting the trialogues with Parliament.

Concerning the accent put by Mr Díaz de Mera García Consuegra on a security act, and on ENISA in particular, I would like to say that we are continuing our work on the draft Cybersecurity Act. We are confident that we will be able to deliver on our promise to achieve a general approach in the Council in June, and to start the first trialogues in close cooperation with our colleagues and true partners from Austria. We are continuing our support to advance all aspects of the file in parallel, so that we can ensure the legal and business continuity of ENISA before the expiry of its current mandate in 2020.

In conclusion, I would like to say that the Facebook and Cambridge Analytica case is important both in terms of data protection, and in terms of fundamental issues such as the rule of law and the democratic process. We must develop democratic resilience, media literacy, tolerance and critical thinking, and this is key for fighting propaganda and manipulation through fake news, which threatens the very foundation of our societies. That is why I would also like to congratulate the Commission on its important step in this regard, namely its setting-up of a high—level expert group to counter fake news and the spread of disinformation online.

As Ms Keller and Mr Didier said during the debate, it is our common duty and Ms Jourová has just confirmed that we are on the same page. So let us combine our institutional forces to ensure that the momentum for searching for balanced but effective solutions is kept high on the political agenda in the European Union and across the world. As I said during my intervention on 16 May in Sofia, the Heads of State and Government plan to discuss the need for social networks and digital platforms to guarantee transparent practices and full protection of citizens’ privacy and personal data.

The Council will continue to follow this debate very closely, and I can assure Members that I paid particular attention to the views expressed here today during this debate.


  La Présidente. – Le débat est clos.

Déclarations écrites (article 162)


  Dominique Bilde (ENF), par écrit. – Si le scandale Cambridge Analytica est exceptionnel par son ampleur, avec de 87 millions de personnes concernées, il doit servir aux Européens de piqûre de rappel. D’abord parce qu’alors qu’en cette période d’hystérie collective autour du soi-disant populisme ou des prétendues « fake news », mâtinée d’un anti-Trumpisme qui tient, au sein des institutions européennes, de l’acte de foi, il faut avoir l’honnêteté de reconnaître la généralisation de l’exploitation des données personnelles à des fins politiques ou commerciales. C’est bien, d’ailleurs, la campagne de Barack Obama, avec l’application « Obama for America », téléchargée par un million d’utilisateurs environ, qui a inauguré à grande échelle la technique de micro-ciblage. Ensuite parce que cette affaire éclate alors que l’Europe baisse la garde. Ainsi, Facebook vient de réintroduire en Europe une application de reconnaissance faciale, alors que son premier lancement avait achoppé sur une décision du régulateur irlandais en 2012. Cette nouvelle version suscite déjà des doutes s’agissant du recueil du consentement, pourtant obligatoire au titre du règlement 2016/679. Qu’il s’agisse du respect des données ou de la vie privée, il est donc préoccupant de constater à quel point l’Europe peine, manifestement, à s’imposer face aux géants d’Internet.


  Tamás Deutsch (PPE), írásban. – A Cambridge Analytica botránnyal összefüggésben rendkívül súlyos szabálytalanságokra, a lehető legsúlyosabb adatlopási cselekményekre derült fény a Facebook tevékenysége kapcsán. A napvilágra került ügy azonban csupán a jéghegy csúcsát jelenti. A Facebook és más nagy nemzetközi internetes vállalatok működését illetően több probléma is felmerül, és megoldást igényel.

A nagy nemzetközi internetes vállalatok online reklámpiaci bevételeiknek köszönhetően eurómilliárdokat kitevő nyereségre tesznek szert, azonban kivonják magukat az adózás alól, és adóelkerülő gyakorlatukkal megkárosítják az európai adófizetőket. Ezek a vállalatok speciális online nyilvánosságot hoznak létre anélkül, hogy bármilyen szabályozás vonatkozna rájuk. Tisztázatlan a helyreigazítási felelősségük, valamint az is, hogy milyen eljárásrendben tilthatnak el valakit egy adott internetes szolgáltatás használatától. Anélkül működtetnek médiatermékeket, hogy bármilyen szabályozás vonatkozna rájuk.

A nagy nemzetközi internetes vállalatok kvázi online európai polgárok százmillióinak az adatait kezelik úgy, hogy az általános európai adatvédelmi és adatbiztonsági szabályok nem érvényesülnek a működésük során, tehát szabályozatlan az általános adatkezeléssel kapcsolatos tevékenységük. Az említett három problémakör rendezése, szabályozása sürgető és nagyon fontos az európai polgárok védelme érdekében.


  Algirdas Saudargas (PPE), raštu. – Turime ne tik visapusiškai ištirti ir svarstyti „Cambidge Analytica“ ir „Facebook“ skandalo mastą bei galimus padarinius mūsų politinei sistemai bei demokratiniams procesams, bet ir imtis konkretaus tikslingo atsako, kad ateityje panašūs pažeidimai nepasikartotų. Matome, jog ligšiolinė teisinė duomenų apsauga neužtikrino skaitmeninių produktų vartotojų ir tokias paslaugas teikiančių įmonių deramo pareigų ir atsakomybės tarpusavio santykio. Dažnai bendrą pobūdį turintis vartotojo sutikimas, kuris gaunamas ne visuomet vartotojui įsigilinus į jo turinį, neturėtų tapti pretekstu neatsakingam elgesiui su privačiais vartotojo duomenimis, perduodant juos trečiosioms šalims. Manau, turime dar daugiau dėmesio skirti duomenų subjekto sutikimo aspektams. Tikiu, jog gegužės mėnesį įsigaliosiantis Bendrasis Europos Sąjungos duomenų apsaugos reglamentas suteiks tvirtus pagrindus visų mūsų duomenų apsaugai, užtikrins saugumą ir privatumą ir tuo pačiu sustiprins demokratinius procesus. Tačiau nereikia užmiršti, kad sparčios technologinės plėtros ir globalizacijos kontekste, būtina siekti, jog duomenų saugumo ir asmens privatumo klausimai taptų esminiais tarptautinės darbotvarkės klausimais. Ateityje svarbu bus užtikrinti tinkamą reglamento įgyvendinimą, priežiūrą ir esant reikalui jo stiprinimą.


  Claudia Țapardel (S&D), în scris. – În contextul scandalului izbucnit în jurul companiilor Facebook - Cambridge Analytica, prin care datele a 87 de milioane de utilizatori Facebook au fost accesate ilegal de o companie de consultanță britanică în scop electoral, asistăm astăzi la o serie de discuții ample privind protejarea datelor personale pe care fiecare utilizator de internet le pune la dispoziția giganților rețelelor sociale.

Aceste dezvăluiri au evidențiat nevoia protejării datelor personale, cu atât mai mult cu cât acestea, obținute în mod ilegal, pot fi utilizate pentru a lovi societatea în punctele sale cele mai sensibile, fie că vorbim de manipularea cetățenilor în timpul procesului electoral sau de influențarea consumatorilor într-un sens care poate duce la distorsionarea pieței și a concurenței loiale.

În acest sens, prin intrarea în vigoare a Directivei europene privind protecția datelor, Parlamentul European răspunde nevoilor tot mai acute ale societății digitale de a avea o reglementare unitară care să asigure protejarea adecvată a datelor personale.

În calitate de europarlamentar, salut această decizie și consider că acest pachet legislativ este indispensabil în vederea protejării integrității și a vieții personale a utilizatorilor digitali. Totodată, am convingerea că este necesar să găsim un echilibru între nevoile pieței și protecția datelor cu caracter personal.

Atnaujinta: 2018 m. rugsėjo 5 d.Teisinė informacija - Privatumo politika